Update to the Vitamin C, Thiamine and Steroids in Sepsis (VICTAS) protocol: statistical analysis plan for a prospective, multicenter, double-blind, adaptive sample size, randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Observational research suggests that combined therapy with Vitamin C, thiamine and hydrocortisone may reduce mortality in patients with septic shock. METHODS AND DESIGN: The Vitamin C, Thiamine and Steroids in Sepsis (VICTAS) trial is a multicenter, double-blind, adaptive sample size, randomized, placebo-controlled trial designed to test the efficacy of combination therapy with vitamin C (1.5 g), thiamine (100 mg), and hydrocortisone (50 mg) given every 6 h for up to 16 doses in patients with respiratory or circulatory dysfunction (or both) resulting from sepsis. The primary outcome is ventilator- and vasopressor-free days with mortality as the key secondary outcome. Recruitment began in August 2018 and is ongoing; 501 participants have been enrolled to date, with a planned maximum sample size of 2000. The Data and Safety Monitoring Board reviewed interim results at N = 200, 300, 400 and 500, and has recommended continuing recruitment. The next interim analysis will occur when N = 1000. This update presents the statistical analysis plan. Specifically, we provide definitions for key treatment and outcome variables, and for intent-to-treat, per-protocol, and safety analysis datasets. We describe the planned descriptive analyses, the main analysis of the primary end point, our approach to secondary and exploratory analyses, and handling of missing data. Our goal is to provide enough detail that our approach could be replicated by an independent study group, thereby enhancing the transparency of the study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03509350. Registered on 26 April 2018

Angiotensin II for the Treatment of Vasodilatory Shock

BACKGROUND Vasodilatory shock that does not respond to high-dose vasopressors is associated with high mortality. We investigated the effectiveness of angiotensin II for the treatment of patients with this condition. METHODS We randomly assigned patients with vasodilatory shock who were receiving more than 0.2 mu g of norepinephrine per kilogram of body weight per minute or the equivalent dose of another vasopressor to receive infusions of either angiotensin II or placebo. The primary end point was a response with respect to mean arterial pressure at hour 3 after the start of infusion, with response defined as an increase from baseline of at least 10 mm Hg or an increase to at least 75 mm Hg, without an increase in the dose of background vasopressors. RESULTS A total of 344 patients were assigned to one of the two regimens; 321 received a study intervention (163 received angiotensin II, and 158 received placebo) and were included in the analysis. The primary end point was reached by more patients in the angiotensin II group (114 of 163 patients, 69.9%) than in the placebo group (37 of 158 patients, 23.4%) (odds ratio, 7.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.76 to 13.3; P<0.001). At 48 hours, the mean improvement in the cardiovascular Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (scores range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating more severe dysfunction) was greater in the angiotensin II group than in the placebo group (-1.75 vs. -1.28, P = 0.01). Serious adverse events were reported in 60.7% of the patients in the angiotensin II group and in 67.1% in the placebo group. Death by day 28 occurred in 75 of 163 patients (46%) in the angiotensin II group and in 85 of 158 patients (54%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.07; P = 0.12). CONCLUSIONS Angiotensin II effectively increased blood pressure in patients with vasodilatory shock that did not respond to high doses of conventional vasopressors. (Funded by La Jolla Pharmaceutical Company; ATHOS-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02338843.)Peer reviewe

Angiotensin in Critical Care

Abstract This article is one of ten reviews selected from the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine 2018. Other selected articles can be found online at https://www.biomedcentral.com/collections/annualupdate2018. Further information about the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine is available from http://www.springer.com/series/8901

Renin and Survival in Patients Given Angiotensin II for Catecholamine-Resistant Vasodilatory Shock A Clinical Trial

Rationale: Exogenous angiotensin II increases mean arterial pressure in patients with catecholamine-resistant vasodilatory shock (CRVS). We hypothesized that renin concentrations may identify patients most likely to benefit from such therapy. Objectives: To test the kinetic changes in renin concentrations and their prognostic value in patients with CRVS. Methods: We analyzed serum samples from patients enrolled in the ATHOS-3 (Angiotensin II for the Treatment of High-Output Shock) trial for renin, angiotensin I, and angiotensin II concentrations before the start of administration of angiotensin II or placebo and after 3 hours. Measurements and Main Results: Baseline serum renin concentration (normal range, 2.13-58.78 pg/ml) was above the upper limits of normal in 194 of 255 (76%) study patients with a median renin concentration of 172.7 pg/ml (interquartile range [IQR], 60.7 to 440.6 pg/ml), approximately threefold higher than the upper limit of normal. Renin concentrations correlated positively with angiotensin I/II ratios (r = 0.39; P Conclusions: The serum renin concentration is markedly elevated in CRVS and may identify patients for whom treatment with angiotensin II has a beneficial effect on clinical outcomes.Peer reviewe

The effect of angiotensin II on blood pressure in patients with circulatory shock: a structured review of the literature

Abstract Background Circulatory shock is a common syndrome with a high mortality and limited therapeutic options. Despite its discovery and use in clinical and experimental settings more than a half-century ago, angiotensin II (Ang II) has only been recently evaluated as a vasopressor in distributive shock. We examined existing literature for associations between Ang II and the resolution of circulatory shock. Methods We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Ovid, and Embase to identify all English literature accounts of intravenous Ang II in humans for the treatment of shock (systolic blood pressure [SBP] ≤ 90 mmHg or a mean arterial pressure [MAP] ≤ 65 mmHg), and hand-searched the references of extracted papers for further studies meeting inclusion criteria. Of 3743 articles identified, 24 studies including 353 patients met inclusion criteria. Complete data existed for 276 patients. Extracted data included study type, publication year, demographics, type of shock, dosing of Ang II or other vasoactive medications, and changes in BP, lactate, and urine output. BP effects were grouped according to type of shock, with additional analyses completed for patients with absent blood pressure. Shock was distributive (n = 225), cardiogenic (n = 38), or from other causes (n = 90). Blood pressure as absent in 18 patients. Results For the 276 patients with complete data, MAP rose by 23.4% from 63.3 mmHg to 78.1 mmHg in response to Ang II (dose range: 15 ng/kg/min to 60 mcg/min). SBP rose by 125.2% from 56.9 mmHg to 128.2 mmHg (dose range: 0.2 mcg/min to a 1500 mcg bolus). A total of 271 patients with complete data were determined to exhibit a BP effect which was directly associated with Ang II. Subgroups (patients with cardiogenic, septic, and other types of shock) exhibited similar increases in BP. In patients with absent BP, deemed to be cardiac arrest, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) was achieved, and BP increased by an average of 107.3 mmHg in 11 of 18 patients. The remaining seven patients with cardiac arrest did not respond. Conclusions Intravenous Ang II is associated with increased BP in patients with cardiogenic, distributive, and unclassified shock. A role may exist for Ang II in restoring circulation in cardiac arrest

Mechanisms of acute eosinophilic inflammation in a case of acute eosinophilic pneumonia in a 14-year-old girl.

BACKGROUND: Acute eosinophilic pneumonia (AEP) is characterized by respiratory distress, eosinophilic infiltration in the lung, acute onset, resolution of symptoms with corticosteroids and the absence of relapse. Studies to identify the pathophysiology of AEP in adults have demonstrated eosinophil activation in the BAL fluid, and the presence of high levels of interleukin 5 (IL-5) in the BAL. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the pathophysiology of AEP with pleural effusion in a paediatric patient. METHODS: ECP levels in the BALand pleural fluid was determined by radioimmunoassay. IL-5 and GM-CSF concentrations in the BAL and pleural fluid were measured by Elisa. Immunohistochemistry studies performed on open lung biopsy included a specific ICAM-1 immunostaining and a ECP specific immunostaining (EG2+). RESULTS: High levels of ECP were found in the BAL (5 microg/L) and pleural fluid (750 microg/L) demonstrating eosinophil activation at these sites. Immunohistochemistry illustrated activated (EG2+) eosinophils in the interalveolar septa and alveolar space and detected increased expression of ICAM-1 on alveolar epithelial cells. High levels of IL-5 were measured in the BAL (1334 pg/mL) and pleural fluid (7014 pg/mL), while elevated concentrations of GM-CSF (150 pg/mL) were found in the BAL. CONCLUSION: We conclude that in this paediatric patient with AEP activated eosinophils were present in the BAL fluid, in the interalveolar septa and in the pleural space while increased ICAM-1 expression was detected on alveolar epithelial cells, contributing, at least partly, for their adhesive interactions. IL-5 and GM-CSF are likely important to the massive eosinophil recruitment and activation in the lung, while IL-5 is probably related to eosinophil accumulation and activation in the pleural space. Thus, lung generation of eosinophil-active cytokines is central to the pathophysiology of AEP in paediatric patients