Implementation of Diabetes Prevention in Health Care Organizations: Best Practice Recommendations

Approximately 1 in 3 American adults has prediabetes, a condition characterized by blood glucose levels that are above normal, not in the type 2 diabetes ranges, and that increases the risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Evidence-based treatments can be used to prevent or delay type 2 diabetes in adults with prediabetes. The American Medical Association (AMA) has collaborated with health care organizations across the country to build sustainable diabetes prevention strategies. In 2017, the AMA formed the Diabetes Prevention Best Practices Workgroup (DPBP) with representatives from 6 health care organizations actively implementing diabetes prevention. Each organization had a unique strategy, but all included the National Diabetes Prevention Program lifestyle change program as a core evidence-based intervention. DPBP established the goal of disseminating best practices to guide other health care organizations in implementing diabetes prevention and identifying and managing patients with prediabetes. Workgroup members recognized similarities in some of their basic steps and considerations and synthesized their practices to develop best practice recommendations for 3 strategy maturity phases. Recommendations for each maturity phase are classified into 6 categories: (1) organizational support; (2) workforce and funding; (3) promotion and dissemination; (4) clinical integration and support; (5) evaluation and outcomes; (6) and program. As the burden of chronic disease grows, prevention must be prioritized and integrated into health care. These maturity phases and best practice recommendations can be used by any health care organization committed to diabetes prevention. Further research is suggested to assess the impact and adoption of diabetes prevention best practices

Expanding tropical forest monitoring into Dry Forests: The DRYFLOR protocol for permanent plots

This is the final version. Available on open access from Wiley via the DOI in this recordSocietal Impact Statement Understanding of tropical forests has been revolutionized by monitoring in permanent plots. Data from global plot networks have transformed our knowledge of forests’ diversity, function, contribution to global biogeochemical cycles, and sensitivity to climate change. Monitoring has thus far been concentrated in rain forests. Despite increasing appreciation of their threatened status, biodiversity, and importance to the global carbon cycle, monitoring in tropical dry forests is still in its infancy. We provide a protocol for permanent monitoring plots in tropical dry forests. Expanding monitoring into dry biomes is critical for overcoming the linked challenges of climate change, land use change, and the biodiversity crisis.Newton FundNatural Environment Research Council (NERC)Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São PauloCYTE

Measuring performance on the Healthcare Access and Quality Index for 195 countries and territories and selected subnational locations: A systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016

Background A key component of achieving universal health coverage is ensuring that all populations have access to quality health care. Examining where gains have occurred or progress has faltered across and within countries is crucial to guiding decisions and strategies for future improvement. We used the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016 (GBD 2016) to assess personal health-care access and quality with the Healthcare Access and Quality (HAQ) Index for 195 countries and territories, as well as subnational locations in seven countries, from 1990 to 2016. Methods Drawing from established methods and updated estimates from GBD 2016, we used 32 causes from which death should not occur in the presence of effective care to approximate personal health-care access and quality by location and over time. To better isolate potential effects of personal health-care access and quality from underlying risk factor patterns, we risk-standardised cause-specific deaths due to non-cancers by location-year, replacing the local joint exposure of environmental and behavioural risks with the global level of exposure. Supported by the expansion of cancer registry data in GBD 2016, we used mortality-to-incidence ratios for cancers instead of risk-standardised death rates to provide a stronger signal of the effects of personal health care and access on cancer survival. We transformed each cause to a scale of 0–100, with 0 as the first percentile (worst) observed between 1990 and 2016, and 100 as the 99th percentile (best); we set these thresholds at the country level, and then applied them to subnational locations. We applied a principal components analysis to construct the HAQ Index using all scaled cause values, providing an overall score of 0–100 of personal health-care access and quality by location over time. We then compared HAQ Index levels and trends by quintiles on the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary measure of overall development. As derived from the broader GBD study and other data sources, we examined relationships between national HAQ Index scores and potential correlates of performance, such as total health spending per capita. Findings In 2016, HAQ Index performance spanned from a high of 97·1 (95% UI 95·8–98·1) in Iceland, followed by 96·6 (94·9–97·9) in Norway and 96·1 (94·5–97·3) in the Netherlands, to values as low as 18·6 (13·1–24·4) in the Central African Republic, 19·0 (14·3–23·7) in Somalia, and 23·4 (20·2–26·8) in Guinea-Bissau. The pace of progress achieved between 1990 and 2016 varied, with markedly faster improvements occurring between 2000 and 2016 for many countries in sub-Saharan Africa and southeast Asia, whereas several countries in Latin America and elsewhere saw progress stagnate after experiencing considerable advances in the HAQ Index between 1990 and 2000. Striking subnational disparities emerged in personal health-care access and quality, with China and India having particularly large gaps between locations with the highest and lowest scores in 2016. In China, performance ranged from 91·5 (89·1–93·6) in Beijing to 48·0 (43·4–53·2) in Tibet (a 43·5-point difference), while India saw a 30·8-point disparity, from 64·8 (59·6–68·8) in Goa to 34·0 (30·3–38·1) in Assam. Japan recorded the smallest range in subnational HAQ performance in 2016 (a 4·8-point difference), whereas differences between subnational locations with the highest and lowest HAQ Index values were more than two times as high for the USA and three times as high for England. State-level gaps in the HAQ Index in Mexico somewhat narrowed from 1990 to 2016 (from a 20·9-point to 17·0-point difference), whereas in Brazil, disparities slightly increased across states during this time (a 17·2-point to 20·4-point difference). Performance on the HAQ Index showed strong linkages to overall development, with high and high-middle SDI countries generally having higher scores and faster gains for non-communicable diseases. Nonetheless, countries across the development spectrum saw substantial gains in some key health service areas from 2000 to 2016, most notably vaccine-preventable diseases. Overall, national performance on the HAQ Index was positively associated with higher levels of total health spending per capita, as well as health systems inputs, but these relationships were quite heterogeneous, particularly among low-to-middle SDI countries. Interpretation GBD 2016 provides a more detailed understanding of past success and current challenges in improving personal health-care access and quality worldwide. Despite substantial gains since 2000, many low-SDI and middle- SDI countries face considerable challenges unless heightened policy action and investments focus on advancing access to and quality of health care across key health services, especially non-communicable diseases. Stagnating or minimal improvements experienced by several low-middle to high-middle SDI countries could reflect the complexities of re-orienting both primary and secondary health-care services beyond the more limited foci of the Millennium Development Goals. Alongside initiatives to strengthen public health programmes, the pursuit of universal health coverage hinges upon improving both access and quality worldwide, and thus requires adopting a more comprehensive view—and subsequent provision—of quality health care for all populations.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Measuring performance on the Healthcare Access and Quality Index for 195 countries and territories and selected subnational locations: A systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016

Background: A key component of achieving universal health coverage is ensuring that all populations have access to quality health care. Examining where gains have occurred or progress has faltered across and within countries is crucial to guiding decisions and strategies for future improvement. We used the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016 (GBD 2016) to assess personal health-care access and quality with the Healthcare Access and Quality (HAQ) Index for 195 countries and territories, as well as subnational locations in seven countries, from 1990 to 2016. Methods Drawing from established methods and updated estimates from GBD 2016, we used 32 causes from which death should not occur in the presence of effective care to approximate personal health-care access and quality by location and over time. To better isolate potential effects of personal health-care access and quality from underlying risk factor patterns, we risk-standardised cause-specific deaths due to non-cancers by location-year, replacing the local joint exposure of environmental and behavioural risks with the global level of exposure. Supported by the expansion of cancer registry data in GBD 2016, we used mortality-to-incidence ratios for cancers instead of risk-standardised death rates to provide a stronger signal of the effects of personal health care and access on cancer survival. We transformed each cause to a scale of 0-100, with 0 as the first percentile (worst) observed between 1990 and 2016, and 100 as the 99th percentile (best); we set these thresholds at the country level, and then applied them to subnational locations. We applied a principal components analysis to construct the HAQ Index using all scaled cause values, providing an overall score of 0-100 of personal health-care access and quality by location over time. We then compared HAQ Index levels and trends by quintiles on the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary measure of overall development. As derived from the broader GBD study and other data sources, we examined relationships between national HAQ Index scores and potential correlates of performance, such as total health spending per capita. Findings In 2016, HAQ Index performance spanned from a high of 97\ub71 (95% UI 95\ub78-98\ub71) in Iceland, followed by 96\ub76 (94\ub79-97\ub79) in Norway and 96\ub71 (94\ub75-97\ub73) in the Netherlands, to values as low as 18\ub76 (13\ub71-24\ub74) in the Central African Republic, 19\ub70 (14\ub73-23\ub77) in Somalia, and 23\ub74 (20\ub72-26\ub78) in Guinea-Bissau. The pace of progress achieved between 1990 and 2016 varied, with markedly faster improvements occurring between 2000 and 2016 for many countries in sub-Saharan Africa and southeast Asia, whereas several countries in Latin America and elsewhere saw progress stagnate after experiencing considerable advances in the HAQ Index between 1990 and 2000. Striking subnational disparities emerged in personal health-care access and quality, with China and India having particularly large gaps between locations with the highest and lowest scores in 2016. In China, performance ranged from 91\ub75 (89\ub71-93\ub76) in Beijing to 48\ub70 (43\ub74-53\ub72) in Tibet (a 43\ub75-point difference), while India saw a 30\ub78-point disparity, from 64\ub78 (59\ub76-68\ub78) in Goa to 34\ub70 (30\ub73-38\ub71) in Assam. Japan recorded the smallest range in subnational HAQ performance in 2016 (a 4\ub78-point difference), whereas differences between subnational locations with the highest and lowest HAQ Index values were more than two times as high for the USA and three times as high for England. State-level gaps in the HAQ Index in Mexico somewhat narrowed from 1990 to 2016 (from a 20\ub79-point to 17\ub70-point difference), whereas in Brazil, disparities slightly increased across states during this time (a 17\ub72-point to 20\ub74-point difference). Performance on the HAQ Index showed strong linkages to overall development, with high and high-middle SDI countries generally having higher scores and faster gains for non-communicable diseases. Nonetheless, countries across the development spectrum saw substantial gains in some key health service areas from 2000 to 2016, most notably vaccine-preventable diseases. Overall, national performance on the HAQ Index was positively associated with higher levels of total health spending per capita, as well as health systems inputs, but these relationships were quite heterogeneous, particularly among low-to-middle SDI countries. Interpretation GBD 2016 provides a more detailed understanding of past success and current challenges in improving personal health-care access and quality worldwide. Despite substantial gains since 2000, many low-SDI and middle- SDI countries face considerable challenges unless heightened policy action and investments focus on advancing access to and quality of health care across key health services, especially non-communicable diseases. Stagnating or minimal improvements experienced by several low-middle to high-middle SDI countries could reflect the complexities of re-orienting both primary and secondary health-care services beyond the more limited foci of the Millennium Development Goals. Alongside initiatives to strengthen public health programmes, the pursuit of universal health coverage hinges upon improving both access and quality worldwide, and thus requires adopting a more comprehensive view-and subsequent provision-of quality health care for all populations

Measuring performance on the Healthcare Access and Quality Index for 195 countries and territories and selected subnational locations: A systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016

Copyright © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. Background A key component of achieving universal health coverage is ensuring that all populations have access to quality health care. Examining where gains have occurred or progress has faltered across and within countries is crucial to guiding decisions and strategies for future improvement. We used the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016 (GBD 2016) to assess personal health-care access and quality with the Healthcare Access and Quality (HAQ) Index for 195 countries and territories, as well as subnational locations in seven countries, from 1990 to 2016. Methods Drawing from established methods and updated estimates from GBD 2016, we used 32 causes from which death should not occur in the presence of effective care to approximate personal health-care access and quality by location and over time. To better isolate potential effects of personal health-care access and quality from underlying risk factor patterns, we risk-standardised cause-specific deaths due to non-cancers by location-year, replacing the local joint exposure of environmental and behavioural risks with the global level of exposure. Supported by the expansion of cancer registry data in GBD 2016, we used mortality-to-incidence ratios for cancers instead of risk-standardised death rates to provide a stronger signal of the effects of personal health care and access on cancer survival. We transformed each cause to a scale of 0-100, with 0 as the first percentile (worst) observed between 1990 and 2016, and 100 as the 99th percentile (best); we set these thresholds at the country level, and then applied them to subnational locations. We applied a principal components analysis to construct the HAQ Index using all scaled cause values, providing an overall score of 0-100 of personal health-care access and quality by location over time. We then compared HAQ Index levels and trends by quintiles on the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary measure of overall development. As derived from the broader GBD study and other data sources, we examined relationships between national HAQ Index scores and potential correlates of performance, such as total health spending per capita. Findings In 2016, HAQ Index performance spanned from a high of 97·1 (95% UI 95·8-98·1) in Iceland, followed by 96·6 (94·9-97·9) in Norway and 96·1 (94·5-97·3) in the Netherlands, to values as low as 18·6 (13·1-24·4) in the Central African Republic, 19·0 (14·3-23·7) in Somalia, and 23·4 (20·2-26·8) in Guinea-Bissau. The pace of progress achieved between 1990 and 2016 varied, with markedly faster improvements occurring between 2000 and 2016 for many countries in sub-Saharan Africa and southeast Asia, whereas several countries in Latin America and elsewhere saw progress stagnate after experiencing considerable advances in the HAQ Index between 1990 and 2000. Striking subnational disparities emerged in personal health-care access and quality, with China and India having particularly large gaps between locations with the highest and lowest scores in 2016. In China, performance ranged from 91·5 (89·1-93·6) in Beijing to 48·0 (43·4-53·2) in Tibet (a 43·5-point difference), while India saw a 30·8-point disparity, from 64·8 (59·6-68·8) in Goa to 34·0 (30·3-38·1) in Assam. Japan recorded the smallest range in subnational HAQ performance in 2016 (a 4·8-point difference), whereas differences between subnational locations with the highest and lowest HAQ Index values were more than two times as high for the USA and three times as high for England. State-level gaps in the HAQ Index in Mexico somewhat narrowed from 1990 to 2016 (from a 20·9-point to 17·0-point difference), whereas in Brazil, disparities slightly increased across states during this time (a 17·2-point to 20·4-point difference). Performance on the HAQ Index showed strong linkages to overall development, with high and high-middle SDI countries generally having higher scores and faster gains for non-communicable diseases. Nonetheless, countries across the development spectrum saw substantial gains in some key health service areas from 2000 to 2016, most notably vaccine-preventable diseases. Overall, national performance on the HAQ Index was positively associated with higher levels of total health spending per capita, as well as health systems inputs, but these relationships were quite heterogeneous, particularly among low-to-middle SDI countries. Interpretation GBD 2016 provides a more detailed understanding of past success and current challenges in improving personal health-care access and quality worldwide. Despite substantial gains since 2000, many low-SDI and middle- SDI countries face considerable challenges unless heightened policy action and investments focus on advancing access to and quality of health care across key health services, especially non-communicable diseases. Stagnating or minimal improvements experienced by several low-middle to high-middle SDI countries could reflect the complexities of re-orienting both primary and secondary health-care services beyond the more limited foci of the Millennium Development Goals. Alongside initiatives to strengthen public health programmes, the pursuit of universal health coverage hinges upon improving both access and quality worldwide, and thus requires adopting a more comprehensive view - and subsequent provision - of quality health care for all populations

Measuring performance on the Healthcare Access and Quality Index for 195 countries and territories and selected subnational locations: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016.

BACKGROUND: A key component of achieving universal health coverage is ensuring that all populations have access to quality health care. Examining where gains have occurred or progress has faltered across and within countries is crucial to guiding decisions and strategies for future improvement. We used the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016 (GBD 2016) to assess personal health-care access and quality with the Healthcare Access and Quality (HAQ) Index for 195 countries and territories, as well as subnational locations in seven countries, from 1990 to 2016. METHODS: Drawing from established methods and updated estimates from GBD 2016, we used 32 causes from which death should not occur in the presence of effective care to approximate personal health-care access and quality by location and over time. To better isolate potential effects of personal health-care access and quality from underlying risk factor patterns, we risk-standardised cause-specific deaths due to non-cancers by location-year, replacing the local joint exposure of environmental and behavioural risks with the global level of exposure. Supported by the expansion of cancer registry data in GBD 2016, we used mortality-to-incidence ratios for cancers instead of risk-standardised death rates to provide a stronger signal of the effects of personal health care and access on cancer survival. We transformed each cause to a scale of 0-100, with 0 as the first percentile (worst) observed between 1990 and 2016, and 100 as the 99th percentile (best); we set these thresholds at the country level, and then applied them to subnational locations. We applied a principal components analysis to construct the HAQ Index using all scaled cause values, providing an overall score of 0-100 of personal health-care access and quality by location over time. We then compared HAQ Index levels and trends by quintiles on the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary measure of overall development. As derived from the broader GBD study and other data sources, we examined relationships between national HAQ Index scores and potential correlates of performance, such as total health spending per capita

31st Annual Meeting and Associated Programs of the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC 2016) : part two

Background The immunological escape of tumors represents one of the main ob- stacles to the treatment of malignancies. The blockade of PD-1 or CTLA-4 receptors represented a milestone in the history of immunotherapy. However, immune checkpoint inhibitors seem to be effective in specific cohorts of patients. It has been proposed that their efficacy relies on the presence of an immunological response. Thus, we hypothesized that disruption of the PD-L1/PD-1 axis would synergize with our oncolytic vaccine platform PeptiCRAd. Methods We used murine B16OVA in vivo tumor models and flow cytometry analysis to investigate the immunological background. Results First, we found that high-burden B16OVA tumors were refractory to combination immunotherapy. However, with a more aggressive schedule, tumors with a lower burden were more susceptible to the combination of PeptiCRAd and PD-L1 blockade. The therapy signifi- cantly increased the median survival of mice (Fig. 7). Interestingly, the reduced growth of contralaterally injected B16F10 cells sug- gested the presence of a long lasting immunological memory also against non-targeted antigens. Concerning the functional state of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), we found that all the immune therapies would enhance the percentage of activated (PD-1pos TIM- 3neg) T lymphocytes and reduce the amount of exhausted (PD-1pos TIM-3pos) cells compared to placebo. As expected, we found that PeptiCRAd monotherapy could increase the number of antigen spe- cific CD8+ T cells compared to other treatments. However, only the combination with PD-L1 blockade could significantly increase the ra- tio between activated and exhausted pentamer positive cells (p= 0.0058), suggesting that by disrupting the PD-1/PD-L1 axis we could decrease the amount of dysfunctional antigen specific T cells. We ob- served that the anatomical location deeply influenced the state of CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes. In fact, TIM-3 expression was in- creased by 2 fold on TILs compared to splenic and lymphoid T cells. In the CD8+ compartment, the expression of PD-1 on the surface seemed to be restricted to the tumor micro-environment, while CD4 + T cells had a high expression of PD-1 also in lymphoid organs. Interestingly, we found that the levels of PD-1 were significantly higher on CD8+ T cells than on CD4+ T cells into the tumor micro- environment (p < 0.0001). Conclusions In conclusion, we demonstrated that the efficacy of immune check- point inhibitors might be strongly enhanced by their combination with cancer vaccines. PeptiCRAd was able to increase the number of antigen-specific T cells and PD-L1 blockade prevented their exhaus- tion, resulting in long-lasting immunological memory and increased median survival

Taking the pulse of Earth's tropical forests using networks of highly distributed plots

Tropical forests are the most diverse and productive ecosystems on Earth. While better understanding of these forests is critical for our collective future, until quite recently efforts to measure and monitor them have been largely disconnected. Networking is essential to discover the answers to questions that transcend borders and the horizons of funding agencies. Here we show how a global community is responding to the challenges of tropical ecosystem research with diverse teams measuring forests tree-by-tree in thousands of long-term plots. We review the major scientific discoveries of this work and show how this process is changing tropical forest science. Our core approach involves linking long-term grassroots initiatives with standardized protocols and data management to generate robust scaled-up results. By connecting tropical researchers and elevating their status, our Social Research Network model recognises the key role of the data originator in scientific discovery. Conceived in 1999 with RAINFOR (South America), our permanent plot networks have been adapted to Africa (AfriTRON) and Southeast Asia (T-FORCES) and widely emulated worldwide. Now these multiple initiatives are integrated via ForestPlots.net cyber-infrastructure, linking colleagues from 54 countries across 24 plot networks. Collectively these are transforming understanding of tropical forests and their biospheric role. Together we have discovered how, where and why forest carbon and biodiversity are responding to climate change, and how they feedback on it. This long-term pan-tropical collaboration has revealed a large long-term carbon sink and its trends, as well as making clear which drivers are most important, which forest processes are affected, where they are changing, what the lags are, and the likely future responses of tropical forests as the climate continues to change. By leveraging a remarkably old technology, plot networks are sparking a very modern revolution in tropical forest science. In the future, humanity can benefit greatly by nurturing the grassroots communities now collectively capable of generating unique, long-term understanding of Earth's most precious forests.Additional co-authors: Susan Laurance, William Laurance, Francoise Yoko Ishida, Andrew Marshall, Catherine Waite, Hannsjoerg Woell, Jean-Francois Bastin, Marijn Bauters, Hans Beeckman, Pfascal Boeckx, Jan Bogaert, Charles De Canniere, Thales de Haulleville, Jean-Louis Doucet, Olivier Hardy, Wannes Hubau, Elizabeth Kearsley, Hans Verbeeck, Jason Vleminckx, Steven W. Brewer, Alfredo Alarcón, Alejandro Araujo-Murakami, Eric Arets, Luzmila Arroyo, Ezequiel Chavez, Todd Fredericksen, René Guillén Villaroel, Gloria Gutierrez Sibauty, Timothy Killeen, Juan Carlos Licona, John Lleigue, Casimiro Mendoza, Samaria Murakami, Alexander Parada Gutierrez, Guido Pardo, Marielos Peña-Claros, Lourens Poorter, Marisol Toledo, Jeanneth Villalobos Cayo, Laura Jessica Viscarra, Vincent Vos, Jorge Ahumada, Everton Almeida, Jarcilene Almeida, Edmar Almeida de Oliveira, Wesley Alves da Cruz, Atila Alves de Oliveira, Fabrício Alvim Carvalho, Flávio Amorim Obermuller, Ana Andrade, Fernanda Antunes Carvalho, Simone Aparecida Vieira, Ana Carla Aquino, Luiz Aragão, Ana Claudia Araújo, Marco Antonio Assis, Jose Ataliba Mantelli Aboin Gomes, Fabrício Baccaro, Plínio Barbosa de Camargo, Paulo Barni, Jorcely Barroso, Luis Carlos Bernacci, Kauane Bordin, Marcelo Brilhante de Medeiros, Igor Broggio, José Luís Camargo, Domingos Cardoso, Maria Antonia Carniello, Andre Luis Casarin Rochelle, Carolina Castilho, Antonio Alberto Jorge Farias Castro, Wendeson Castro, Sabina Cerruto Ribeiro, Flávia Costa, Rodrigo Costa de Oliveira, Italo Coutinho, John Cunha, Lola da Costa, Lucia da Costa Ferreira, Richarlly da Costa Silva, Marta da Graça Zacarias Simbine, Vitor de Andrade Kamimura, Haroldo Cavalcante de Lima, Lia de Oliveira Melo, Luciano de Queiroz, José Romualdo de Sousa Lima, Mário do Espírito Santo, Tomas Domingues, Nayane Cristina dos Santos Prestes, Steffan Eduardo Silva Carneiro, Fernando Elias, Gabriel Eliseu, Thaise Emilio, Camila Laís Farrapo, Letícia Fernandes, Gustavo Ferreira, Joice Ferreira, Leandro Ferreira, Socorro Ferreira, Marcelo Fragomeni Simon, Maria Aparecida Freitas, Queila S. García, Angelo Gilberto Manzatto, Paulo Graça, Frederico Guilherme, Eduardo Hase, Niro Higuchi, Mariana Iguatemy, Reinaldo Imbrozio Barbosa, Margarita Jaramillo, Carlos Joly, Joice Klipel, Iêda Leão do Amaral, Carolina Levis, Antonio S. Lima, Maurício Lima Dan, Aline Lopes, Herison Madeiros, William E. Magnusson, Rubens Manoel dos Santos, Beatriz Marimon, Ben Hur Marimon Junior, Roberta Marotti Martelletti Grillo, Luiz Martinelli, Simone Matias Reis, Salomão Medeiros, Milton Meira-Junior, Thiago Metzker, Paulo Morandi, Natanael Moreira do Nascimento, Magna Moura, Sandra Cristina Müller, Laszlo Nagy, Henrique Nascimento, Marcelo Nascimento, Adriano Nogueira Lima, Raimunda Oliveira de Araújo, Jhonathan Oliveira Silva, Marcelo Pansonato, Gabriel Pavan Sabino, Karla Maria Pedra de Abreu, Pablo José Francisco Pena Rodrigues, Maria Piedade, Domingos Rodrigues, José Roberto Rodrigues Pinto, Carlos Quesada, Eliana Ramos, Rafael Ramos, Priscyla Rodrigues, Thaiane Rodrigues de Sousa, Rafael Salomão, Flávia Santana, Marcos Scaranello, Rodrigo Scarton Bergamin, Juliana Schietti, Jochen Schöngart, Gustavo Schwartz, Natalino Silva, Marcos Silveira, Cristiana Simão Seixas, Marta Simbine, Ana Claudia Souza, Priscila Souza, Rodolfo Souza, Tereza Sposito, Edson Stefani Junior, Julio Daniel do Vale, Ima Célia Guimarães Vieira, Dora Villela, Marcos Vital, Haron Xaud, Katia Zanini, Charles Eugene Zartman, Nur Khalish Hafizhah Ideris, Faizah binti Hj Metali, Kamariah Abu Salim, Muhd Shahruney Saparudin, Rafizah Mat Serudin, Rahayu Sukmaria Sukri, Serge Begne, George Chuyong, Marie Noel Djuikouo, Christelle Gonmadje, Murielle Simo-Droissart, Bonaventure Sonké, Hermann Taedoumg, Lise Zemagho, Sean Thomas, Fidèle Baya, Gustavo Saiz, Javier Silva Espejo, Dexiang Chen, Alan Hamilton, Yide Li, Tushou Luo, Shukui Niu, Han Xu, Zhang Zhou, Esteban Álvarez-Dávila, Juan Carlos Andrés Escobar, Henry Arellano-Peña, Jaime Cabezas Duarte, Jhon Calderón, Lina Maria Corrales Bravo, Borish Cuadrado, Hermes Cuadros, Alvaro Duque, Luisa Fernanda Duque, Sandra Milena Espinosa, Rebeca Franke-Ante, Hernando García, Alejandro Gómez, Roy González-M., Álvaro Idárraga-Piedrahíta, Eliana Jimenez, Rubén Jurado, Wilmar López Oviedo, René López-Camacho, Omar Aurelio Melo Cruz, Irina Mendoza Polo, Edwin Paky, Karen Pérez, Angel Pijachi, Camila Pizano, Adriana Prieto, Laura Ramos, Zorayda Restrepo Correa, James Richardson, Elkin Rodríguez, Gina M. Rodriguez M., Agustín Rudas, Pablo Stevenson, Markéta Chudomelová, Martin Dancak, Radim Hédl, Stanislav Lhota, Martin Svatek, Jacques Mukinzi, Corneille Ewango, Terese Hart, Emmanuel Kasongo Yakusu, Janvier Lisingo, Jean-Remy Makana, Faustin Mbayu, Benjamin Toirambe, John Tshibamba Mukendi, Lars Kvist, Gustav Nebel, Selene Báez, Carlos Céron, Daniel M. Griffith, Juan Ernesto Guevara Andino, David Neill, Walter Palacios, Maria Cristina Peñuela-Mora, Gonzalo Rivas-Torres, Gorky Villa, Sheleme Demissie, Tadesse Gole, Techane Gonfa, Kalle Ruokolainen, Michel Baisie, Fabrice Bénédet, Wemo Betian, Vincent Bezard, Damien Bonal, Jerôme Chave, Vincent Droissart, Sylvie Gourlet-Fleury, Annette Hladik, Nicolas Labrière, Pétrus Naisso, Maxime Réjou-Méchain, Plinio Sist, Lilian Blanc, Benoit Burban, Géraldine Derroire, Aurélie Dourdain, Clement Stahl, Natacha Nssi Bengone, Eric Chezeaux, Fidèle Evouna Ondo, Vincent Medjibe, Vianet Mihindou, Lee White, Heike Culmsee, Cristabel Durán Rangel, Viviana Horna, Florian Wittmann, Stephen Adu-Bredu, Kofi Affum-Baffoe, Ernest Foli, Michael Balinga, Anand Roopsind, James Singh, Raquel Thomas, Roderick Zagt, Indu K. Murthy, Kuswata Kartawinata, Edi Mirmanto, Hari Priyadi, Ismayadi Samsoedin, Terry Sunderland, Ishak Yassir, Francesco Rovero, Barbara Vinceti, Bruno Hérault, Shin-Ichiro Aiba, Kanehiro Kitayama, Armandu Daniels, Darlington Tuagben, John T. Woods, Muhammad Fitriadi, Alexander Karolus, Kho Lip Khoon, Noreen Majalap, Colin Maycock, Reuben Nilus, Sylvester Tan, Almeida Sitoe, Indiana Coronado G., Lucas Ojo, Rafael de Assis, Axel Dalberg Poulsen, Douglas Sheil, Karen Arévalo Pezo, Hans Buttgenbach Verde, Victor Chama Moscoso, Jimmy Cesar Cordova Oroche, Fernando Cornejo Valverde, Massiel Corrales Medina, Nallaret Davila Cardozo, Jano de Rutte Corzo, Jhon del Aguila Pasquel, Gerardo Flores Llampazo, Luis Freitas, Darcy Galiano Cabrera, Roosevelt García Villacorta, Karina Garcia Cabrera, Diego García Soria, Leticia Gatica Saboya, Julio Miguel Grandez Rios, Gabriel Hidalgo Pizango, Eurídice Honorio Coronado, Isau Huamantupa-Chuquimaco, Walter Huaraca Huasco, Yuri Tomas Huillca Aedo, Jose Luis Marcelo Peña, Abel Monteagudo Mendoza, Vanesa Moreano Rodriguez, Percy Núñez Vargas, Sonia Cesarina Palacios Ramos, Nadir Pallqui Camacho, Antonio Peña Cruz, Freddy Ramirez Arevalo, José Reyna Huaymacari, Carlos Reynel Rodriguez, Marcos Antonio Ríos Paredes, Lily Rodriguez Bayona, Rocio del Pilar Rojas Gonzales, Maria Elena Rojas Peña, Norma Salinas Revilla, Yahn Carlos Soto Shareva, Raul Tupayachi Trujillo, Luis Valenzuela Gamarra, Rodolfo Vasquez Martinez, Jim Vega Arenas, Christian Amani, Suspense Averti Ifo, Yannick Bocko, Patrick Boundja, Romeo Ekoungoulou, Mireille Hockemba, Donatien Nzala, Alusine Fofanah, David Taylor, Guillermo Bañares-de Dios, Luis Cayuela, Íñigo Granzow-de la Cerda, Manuel Macía, Juliana Stropp, Maureen Playfair, Verginia Wortel, Toby Gardner, Robert Muscarella, Hari Priyadi, Ervan Rutishauser, Kuo-Jung Chao, Pantaleo Munishi, Olaf Bánki, Frans Bongers, Rene Boot, Gabriella Fredriksson, Jan Reitsma, Hans ter Steege, Tinde van Andel, Peter van de Meer, Peter van der Hout, Mark van Nieuwstadt, Bert van Ulft, Elmar Veenendaal, Ronald Vernimmen, Pieter Zuidema, Joeri Zwerts, Perpetra Akite, Robert Bitariho, Colin Chapman, Eilu Gerald, Miguel Leal, Patrick Mucunguzi, Miguel Alexiades, Timothy R. Baker, Karina Banda, Lindsay Banin, Jos Barlow, Amy Bennett, Erika Berenguer, Nicholas Berry, Neil M. Bird, George A. Blackburn, Francis Brearley, Roel Brienen, David Burslem, Lidiany Carvalho, Percival Cho, Fernanda Coelho, Murray Collins, David Coomes, Aida Cuni-Sanchez, Greta Dargie, Kyle Dexter, Mat Disney, Freddie Draper, Muying Duan, Adriane Esquivel-Muelbert, Robert Ewers, Belen Fadrique, Sophie Fauset, Ted R. Feldpausch, Filipe França, David Galbraith, Martin Gilpin, Emanuel Gloor, John Grace, Keith Hamer, David Harris, Tommaso Jucker, Michelle Kalamandeen, Bente Klitgaard, Aurora Levesley, Simon L. Lewis, Jeremy Lindsell, Gabriela Lopez-Gonzalez, Jon Lovett, Yadvinder Malhi, Toby Marthews, Emma McIntosh, Karina Melgaço, William Milliken, Edward Mitchard, Peter Moonlight, Sam Moore, Alexandra Morel, Julie Peacock, Kelvin Peh, Colin Pendry, R. Toby Pennington, Luciana de Oliveira Pereira, Carlos Peres, Oliver L. Phillips, Georgia Pickavance, Thomas Pugh, Lan Qie, Terhi Riutta, Katherine Roucoux, Casey Ryan, Tiina Sarkinen, Camila Silva Valeria, Dominick Spracklen, Suzanne Stas, Martin Sullivan, Michael Swaine, Joey Talbot, James Taplin, Geertje van der Heijden, Laura Vedovato, Simon Willcock, Mathew Williams, Luciana Alves, Patricia Alvarez Loayza, Gabriel Arellano, Cheryl Asa, Peter Ashton, Gregory Asner, Terry Brncic, Foster Brown, Robyn Burnham, Connie Clark, James Comiskey, Gabriel Damasco, Stuart Davies, Tony Di Fiore, Terry Erwin, William Farfan-Rios, Jefferson Hall, David Kenfack, Thomas Lovejoy, Roberta Martin, Olga Martha Montiel, John Pipoly, Nigel Pitman, John Poulsen, Richard Primack, Miles Silman, Marc Steininger, Varun Swamy, John Terborgh, Duncan Thomas, Peter Umunay, Maria Uriarte, Emilio Vilanova Torre, Ophelia Wang, Kenneth Young, Gerardo A. Aymard C., Lionel Hernández, Rafael Herrera Fernández, Hirma Ramírez-Angulo, Pedro Salcedo, Elio Sanoja, Julio Serrano, Armando Torres-Lezama, Tinh Cong Le, Trai Trong Le, Hieu Dang Tra

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570