Prognostic significance of muscle fasciculations in critically Ill COVID-19 patients under mechanical ventilation

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic brought unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems worldwide, particularly the often challenging physical recovery from critical illness. Among the myriad complications faced by these patients, ICU-acquired weakness (ICU-AW) stands out due to its significant impact on patient outcomes. ICU-AW, characterized by skeletal muscle atrophy and weakness, is linked to critical illness polyneuropathy (CIN), myopathy (CIM), and muscle atrophy. Notably, fasciculations, or involuntary muscle twitches, have been observed in patients with ICU-AW, suggesting altered muscle fiber excitability. This study aimed to describe the pattern of fasciculations in critically ill mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients, assess clinical features associated with fasciculations, and evaluate their prognostic significance. Methods: The study enrolled patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) with COVID-19 infection requiring intubation and mechanical ventilation. Quadriceps muscles were assessed using muscle skeletal (MSK) ultrasound and Phase Angle (PhA) through multifrequency segmental bioelectrical impedance analysis (MFBIA) every 72 h. PhA is considered a marker of cell membrane integrity and function, with lower PhA values indicating reduced skeletal muscle quality and increased risk of sarcopenia. Fasciculations were classified based on their appearance and frequency. Results: A total of 35 intubated patients were studied, with 15 patients (43%) displaying scattered fasciculations exclusively in the vastus intermedius muscles. Upon admission, the study found no significant difference in PhA between the fasciculation and non-fasciculation groups. However, PhA decreased significantly from admission to discharge ICU only in the fasciculation group. Patients with fasciculations exhibited higher mortality rates, though not statistically significant, and this correlated with prolonged ICU and hospital lengths of stay. Discussion: This study is the first to report scattered fasciculations in the vastus intermedius muscles of multiple patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection identified with MSK ultrasound. The findings suggest that the combination of impaired muscle cellular function (PhA) and the onset of fasciculations could serve as a potential biomarker of adverse outcomes and ICU-related muscle dysfunction and muscle loss

Type 2 alveolar cells are stem cells in adult lung

Gas exchange in the lung occurs within alveoli, air-filled sacs composed of type 2 and type 1 epithelial cells (AEC2s and AEC1s), capillaries, and various resident mesenchymal cells. Here, we use a combination of in vivo clonal lineage analysis, different injury/repair systems, and in vitro culture of purified cell populations to obtain new information about the contribution of AEC2s to alveolar maintenance and repair. Genetic lineage-tracing experiments showed that surfactant protein C–positive (SFTPC-positive) AEC2s self renew and differentiate over about a year, consistent with the population containing long-term alveolar stem cells. Moreover, if many AEC2s were specifically ablated, high-resolution imaging of intact lungs showed that individual survivors undergo rapid clonal expansion and daughter cell dispersal. Individual lineage-labeled AEC2s placed into 3D culture gave rise to self-renewing “alveolospheres,” which contained both AEC2s and cells expressing multiple AEC1 markers, including HOPX, a new marker for AEC1s. Growth and differentiation of the alveolospheres occurred most readily when cocultured with primary PDGFRα+ lung stromal cells. This population included lipofibroblasts that normally reside close to AEC2s and may therefore contribute to a stem cell niche in the murine lung. Results suggest that a similar dynamic exists between AEC2s and mesenchymal cells in the human lung

Repair and Regeneration of the Respiratory System: Complexity, Plasticity, and Mechanisms of Lung Stem Cell Function

Respiratory disease is the third leading cause of death in the industrialized world. Consequently, the trachea, lungs, and cardiopulmonary vasculature have been the focus of extensive investigations. Recent studies have provided new information about the mechanisms driving lung development and differentiation. However, there is still much to learn about the ability of the adult respiratory system to undergo repair and to replace cells lost in response to injury and disease. This review highlights the multiple stem/progenitor populations in different regions of the adult lung, the plasticity of their behavior in injury models, and molecular pathways that support homeostasis and repair

Intravenous Aviptadil and Remdesivir for Treatment of COVID-19-Associated Hypoxaemic Respiratory Failure in the USA (Tesico): A Randomised, Placebo-Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND: There is a clinical need for therapeutics for COVID-19 patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure whose 60-day mortality remains at 30-50%. Aviptadil, a lung-protective neuropeptide, and remdesivir, a nucleotide prodrug of an adenosine analog, were compared with placebo among patients with COVID-19 acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure. METHODS: TESICO was a randomised trial of aviptadil and remdesivir versus placebo at 28 sites in the USA. Hospitalised adult patients were eligible for the study if they had acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and were within 4 days of the onset of respiratory failure. Participants could be randomly assigned to both study treatments in a 2 × 2 factorial design or to just one of the agents. Participants were randomly assigned with a web-based application. For each site, randomisation was stratified by disease severity (high-flow nasal oxygen or non-invasive ventilation vs invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [ECMO]), and four strata were defined by remdesivir and aviptadil eligibility, as follows: (1) eligible for randomisation to aviptadil and remdesivir in the 2 × 2 factorial design; participants were equally randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to intravenous aviptadil plus remdesivir, aviptadil plus remdesivir matched placebo, aviptadil matched placebo plus remdesvir, or aviptadil placebo plus remdesivir placebo; (2) eligible for randomisation to aviptadil only because remdesivir was started before randomisation; (3) eligible for randomisation to aviptadil only because remdesivir was contraindicated; and (4) eligible for randomisation to remdesivir only because aviptadil was contraindicated. For participants in strata 2-4, randomisation was 1:1 to the active agent or matched placebo. Aviptadil was administered as a daily 12-h infusion for 3 days, targeting 600 pmol/kg on infusion day 1, 1200 pmol/kg on day 2, and 1800 pmol/kg on day 3. Remdesivir was administered as a 200 mg loading dose, followed by 100 mg daily maintenance doses for up to a 10-day total course. For participants assigned to placebo for either agent, matched saline placebo was administered in identical volumes. For both treatment comparisons, the primary outcome, assessed at day 90, was a six-category ordinal outcome: (1) at home (defined as the type of residence before hospitalisation) and off oxygen (recovered) for at least 77 days, (2) at home and off oxygen for 49-76 days, (3) at home and off oxygen for 1-48 days, (4) not hospitalised but either on supplemental oxygen or not at home, (5) hospitalised or in hospice care, or (6) dead. Mortality up to day 90 was a key secondary outcome. The independent data and safety monitoring board recommended stopping the aviptadil trial on May 25, 2022, for futility. On June 9, 2022, the sponsor stopped the trial of remdesivir due to slow enrolment. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04843761. FINDINGS: Between April 21, 2021, and May 24, 2022, we enrolled 473 participants in the study. For the aviptadil comparison, 471 participants were randomly assigned to aviptadil or matched placebo. The modified intention-to-treat population comprised 461 participants who received at least a partial infusion of aviptadil (231 participants) or aviptadil matched placebo (230 participants). For the remdesivir comparison, 87 participants were randomly assigned to remdesivir or matched placebo and all received some infusion of remdesivir (44 participants) or remdesivir matched placebo (43 participants). 85 participants were included in the modified intention-to-treat analyses for both agents (ie, those enrolled in the 2 x 2 factorial). For the aviptadil versus placebo comparison, the median age was 57 years (IQR 46-66), 178 (39%) of 461 participants were female, and 246 (53%) were Black, Hispanic, Asian or other (vs 215 [47%] White participants). 431 (94%) of 461 participants were in an intensive care unit at baseline, with 271 (59%) receiving high-flow nasal oxygen or non-invasive ventiliation, 185 (40%) receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, and five (1%) receiving ECMO. The odds ratio (OR) for being in a better category of the primary efficacy endpoint for aviptadil versus placebo at day 90, from a model stratified by baseline disease severity, was 1·11 (95% CI 0·80-1·55; p=0·54). Up to day 90, 86 participants in the aviptadil group and 83 in the placebo group died. The cumulative percentage who died up to day 90 was 38% in the aviptadil group and 36% in the placebo group (hazard ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·77-1·41; p=0·78). The primary safety outcome of death, serious adverse events, organ failure, serious infection, or grade 3 or 4 adverse events up to day 5 occurred in 146 (63%) of 231 patients in the aviptadil group compared with 129 (56%) of 230 participants in the placebo group (OR 1·40, 95% CI 0·94-2·08; p=0·10). INTERPRETATION: Among patients with COVID-19-associated acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, aviptadil did not significantly improve clinical outcomes up to day 90 when compared with placebo. The smaller than planned sample size for the remdesivir trial did not permit definitive conclusions regarding safety or efficacy. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health

Type 2 alveolar cells are stem cells in adult lung

Gas exchange in the lung occurs within alveoli, air-filled sacs composed of type 2 and type 1 epithelial cells (AEC2s and AEC1s), capillaries, and various resident mesenchymal cells. Here, we use a combination of in vivo clonal lineage analysis, different injury/repair systems, and in vitro culture of purified cell populations to obtain new information about the contribution of AEC2s to alveolar maintenance and repair. Genetic lineage-tracing experiments showed that surfactant protein C–positive (SFTPC-positive) AEC2s self renew and differentiate over about a year, consistent with the population containing long-term alveolar stem cells. Moreover, if many AEC2s were specifically ablated, high-resolution imaging of intact lungs showed that individual survivors undergo rapid clonal expansion and daughter cell dispersal. Individual lineage-labeled AEC2s placed into 3D culture gave rise to self-renewing “alveolospheres,” which contained both AEC2s and cells expressing multiple AEC1 markers, including HOPX, a new marker for AEC1s. Growth and differentiation of the alveolospheres occurred most readily when cocultured with primary PDGFRα(+) lung stromal cells. This population included lipofibroblasts that normally reside close to AEC2s and may therefore contribute to a stem cell niche in the murine lung. Results suggest that a similar dynamic exists between AEC2s and mesenchymal cells in the human lung

Design and implementation of an international, multi-arm, multi-stage platform master protocol for trials of novel SARS-CoV-2 antiviral agents: Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 (TICO/ACTIV-3)

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Safe and effective therapies for COVID-19 are urgently needed. In order to meet this need, the Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines public-private partnership initiated the Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19. Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 is a multi-arm, multi-stage platform master protocol, which facilitates the rapid evaluation of the safety and efficacy of novel candidate antiviral therapeutic agents for adults hospitalized with COVID-19. Five agents have so far entered the protocol, with rapid answers already provided for three of these. Other agents are expected to enter the protocol throughout 2021. This protocol contains a number of key design and implementation features that, along with challenges faced by the protocol team, are presented and discussed. METHODS: Three clinical trial networks, encompassing a global network of clinical sites, participated in the protocol development and implementation. Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 utilizes a multi-arm, multi-stage design with an agile and robust approach to futility and safety evaluation at 300 patients enrolled, with subsequent expansion to full sample size and an expanded target population if the agent shows an acceptable safety profile and evidence of efficacy. Rapid recruitment to multiple agents is enabled through the sharing of placebo, the confining of agent-specific information to protocol appendices, and modular consent forms. In collaboration with the Food and Drug Administration, a thorough safety data collection and Data and Safety Monitoring Board schedule was developed for the study of potential therapeutic agents with limited in-human data in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. RESULTS: As of 8 August 2021, five agents have entered the Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 master protocol and a total of 1909 participants have been randomized to one of these agents or matching placebo. There were a number of challenges faced by the study team that needed to be overcome in order to successfully implement Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 across a global network of sites. These included ensuring drug supply and reliable recruitment allowing for changing infection rates across the global network of sites, the need to balance the collection of data and samples without overburdening clinical staff and obtaining regulatory approvals across a global network of sites. CONCLUSION: Through a robust multi-network partnership, the Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 protocol has been successfully used across a global network of sites for rapid generation of efficacy data on multiple novel antiviral agents. The protocol design and implementation features used in this protocol, and the approaches to address challenges, will have broader applicability. Mechanisms to facilitate improved communication and harmonization among country-specific regulatory bodies are required to achieve the full potential of this approach in dealing with a global outbreak

Responses to a Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibody for Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 According to Baseline Antibody and Antigen Levels : A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND: In a randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial, bamlanivimab, a SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing monoclonal antibody, given in combination with remdesivir, did not improve outcomes among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 based on an early futility assessment. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the a priori hypothesis that bamlanivimab has greater benefit in patients without detectable levels of endogenous neutralizing antibody (nAb) at study entry than in those with antibodies, especially if viral levels are high. DESIGN: Randomized, placebo-controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04501978). SETTING: Multicenter trial. PATIENTS: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 without end-organ failure. INTERVENTION: Bamlanivimab (7000 mg) or placebo. MEASUREMENTS: Antibody, antigen, and viral RNA levels were centrally measured on stored specimens collected at baseline. Patients were followed for 90 days for sustained recovery (defined as discharge to home and remaining home for 14 consecutive days) and a composite safety outcome (death, serious adverse events, organ failure, or serious infections). RESULTS: Among 314 participants (163 receiving bamlanivimab and 151 placebo), the median time to sustained recovery was 19 days and did not differ between the bamlanivimab and placebo groups (subhazard ratio [sHR], 0.99 [95% CI, 0.79 to 1.22]; sHR \u3e 1 favors bamlanivimab). At entry, 50% evidenced production of anti-spike nAbs; 50% had SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid plasma antigen levels of at least 1000 ng/L. Among those without and with nAbs at study entry, the sHRs were 1.24 (CI, 0.90 to 1.70) and 0.74 (CI, 0.54 to 1.00), respectively (nominal for interaction = 0.018). The sHR (bamlanivimab vs. placebo) was also more than 1 for those with plasma antigen or nasal viral RNA levels above median level at entry and was greatest for those without antibodies and with elevated levels of antigen (sHR, 1.48 [CI, 0.99 to 2.23]) or viral RNA (sHR, 1.89 [CI, 1.23 to 2.91]). Hazard ratios for the composite safety outcome (\u3c1 favors bamlanivimab) also differed by serostatus at entry: 0.67 (CI, 0.37 to 1.20) for those without and 1.79 (CI, 0.92 to 3.48) for those with nAbs. LIMITATION: Subgroup analysis of a trial prematurely stopped because of futility; small sample size; multiple subgroups analyzed. CONCLUSION: Efficacy and safety of bamlanivimab may differ depending on whether an endogenous nAb response has been mounted. The limited sample size of the study does not allow firm conclusions based on these findings, and further independent trials are required that assess other types of passive immune therapies in the same patient setting. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. government Operation Warp Speed and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases