Sarilumab in patients admitted to hospital with severe or critical COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

Background: Elevated proinflammatory cytokines are associated with greater COVID-19 severity. We aimed to assess safety and efficacy of sarilumab, an interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor, in patients with severe (requiring supplemental oxygen by nasal cannula or face mask) or critical (requiring greater supplemental oxygen, mechanical ventilation, or extracorporeal support) COVID-19. Methods: We did a 60-day, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational phase 3 trial at 45 hospitals in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Russia, and Spain. We included adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and pneumonia, who required oxygen supplementation or intensive care. Patients were randomly assigned (2:2:1 with permuted blocks of five) to receive intravenous sarilumab 400 mg, sarilumab 200 mg, or placebo. Patients, care providers, outcome assessors, and investigators remained masked to assigned intervention throughout the course of the study. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement of two or more points (seven point scale ranging from 1 [death] to 7 [discharged from hospital]) in the modified intention-to-treat population. The key secondary endpoint was proportion of patients alive at day 29. Safety outcomes included adverse events and laboratory assessments. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04327388; EudraCT, 2020-001162-12; and WHO, U1111-1249-6021. Findings: Between March 28 and July 3, 2020, of 431 patients who were screened, 420 patients were randomly assigned and 416 received placebo (n=84 [20%]), sarilumab 200 mg (n=159 [38%]), or sarilumab 400 mg (n=173 [42%]). At day 29, no significant differences were seen in median time to an improvement of two or more points between placebo (12·0 days [95% CI 9·0 to 15·0]) and sarilumab 200 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 12·0]; hazard ratio [HR] 1·03 [95% CI 0·75 to 1·40]; log-rank p=0·96) or sarilumab 400 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 13·0]; HR 1·14 [95% CI 0·84 to 1·54]; log-rank p=0·34), or in proportions of patients alive (77 [92%] of 84 patients in the placebo group; 143 [90%] of 159 patients in the sarilumab 200 mg group; difference −1·7 [−9·3 to 5·8]; p=0·63 vs placebo; and 159 [92%] of 173 patients in the sarilumab 400 mg group; difference 0·2 [−6·9 to 7·4]; p=0·85 vs placebo). At day 29, there were numerical, non-significant survival differences between sarilumab 400 mg (88%) and placebo (79%; difference +8·9% [95% CI −7·7 to 25·5]; p=0·25) for patients who had critical disease. No unexpected safety signals were seen. The rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were 65% (55 of 84) in the placebo group, 65% (103 of 159) in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 70% (121 of 173) in the sarilumab 400 mg group, and of those leading to death 11% (nine of 84) were in the placebo group, 11% (17 of 159) were in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 10% (18 of 173) were in the sarilumab 400 mg group. Interpretation: This trial did not show efficacy of sarilumab in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 and receiving supplemental oxygen. Adequately powered trials of targeted immunomodulatory therapies assessing survival as a primary endpoint are suggested in patients with critical COVID-19. Funding: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals

Proceedings of the 3rd Biennial Conference of the Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) 2015: advancing efficient methodologies through community partnerships and team science

It is well documented that the majority of adults, children and families in need of evidence-based behavioral health interventionsi do not receive them [1, 2] and that few robust empirically supported methods for implementing evidence-based practices (EBPs) exist. The Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) represents a burgeoning effort to advance the innovation and rigor of implementation research and is uniquely focused on bringing together researchers and stakeholders committed to evaluating the implementation of complex evidence-based behavioral health interventions. Through its diverse activities and membership, SIRC aims to foster the promise of implementation research to better serve the behavioral health needs of the population by identifying rigorous, relevant, and efficient strategies that successfully transfer scientific evidence to clinical knowledge for use in real world settings [3]. SIRC began as a National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)-funded conference series in 2010 (previously titled the “Seattle Implementation Research Conference”; $150,000 USD for 3 conferences in 2011, 2013, and 2015) with the recognition that there were multiple researchers and stakeholdersi working in parallel on innovative implementation science projects in behavioral health, but that formal channels for communicating and collaborating with one another were relatively unavailable. There was a significant need for a forum within which implementation researchers and stakeholders could learn from one another, refine approaches to science and practice, and develop an implementation research agenda using common measures, methods, and research principles to improve both the frequency and quality with which behavioral health treatment implementation is evaluated. SIRC’s membership growth is a testament to this identified need with more than 1000 members from 2011 to the present.ii SIRC’s primary objectives are to: (1) foster communication and collaboration across diverse groups, including implementation researchers, intermediariesi, as well as community stakeholders (SIRC uses the term “EBP champions” for these groups) – and to do so across multiple career levels (e.g., students, early career faculty, established investigators); and (2) enhance and disseminate rigorous measures and methodologies for implementing EBPs and evaluating EBP implementation efforts. These objectives are well aligned with Glasgow and colleagues’ [4] five core tenets deemed critical for advancing implementation science: collaboration, efficiency and speed, rigor and relevance, improved capacity, and cumulative knowledge. SIRC advances these objectives and tenets through in-person conferences, which bring together multidisciplinary implementation researchers and those implementing evidence-based behavioral health interventions in the community to share their work and create professional connections and collaborations

Design, construction and operation of the ProtoDUNE-SP Liquid Argon TPC

The ProtoDUNE-SP detector is a single-phase liquid argon time projection chamber (LArTPC) that was constructed and operated in the CERN North Area at the end of the H4 beamline. This detector is a prototype for the first far detector module of the Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE), which will be constructed at the Sandford Underground Research Facility (SURF) in Lead, South Dakota, U.S.A. The ProtoDUNE-SP detector incorporates full-size components as designed for DUNE and has an active volume of 7 × 6 × 7.2 m3. The H4 beam delivers incident particles with well-measured momenta and high-purity particle identification. ProtoDUNE-SP's successful operation between 2018 and 2020 demonstrates the effectiveness of the single-phase far detector design. This paper describes the design, construction, assembly and operation of the detector components

Low exposure long-baseline neutrino oscillation sensitivity of the DUNE experiment

The Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE) will produce world-leading neutrino oscillation measurements over the lifetime of the experiment. In this work, we explore DUNE's sensitivity to observe charge-parity violation (CPV) in the neutrino sector, and to resolve the mass ordering, for exposures of up to 100 kiloton-megawatt-years (kt-MW-yr). The analysis includes detailed uncertainties on the flux prediction, the neutrino interaction model, and detector effects. We demonstrate that DUNE will be able to unambiguously resolve the neutrino mass ordering at a 3σ (5σ) level, with a 66 (100) kt-MW-yr far detector exposure, and has the ability to make strong statements at significantly shorter exposures depending on the true value of other oscillation parameters. We also show that DUNE has the potential to make a robust measurement of CPV at a 3σ level with a 100 kt-MW-yr exposure for the maximally CP-violating values \delta_{\rm CP}} = \pm\pi/2. Additionally, the dependence of DUNE's sensitivity on the exposure taken in neutrino-enhanced and antineutrino-enhanced running is discussed. An equal fraction of exposure taken in each beam mode is found to be close to optimal when considered over the entire space of interest

Biocompatibility in vitro tests of mineral trioxide aggregate and regular and white Portland cements

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and Portland cement are being used in dentistry as root end-filling materials. However, biocompatibility data concerning genotoxicity and cytotoxicity are needed for complete risk assessment of these compounds. In the present study, genotoxic and cytotoxic effects of MTA and Portland cements were evaluated in vitro using the alkaline single cell gel (comet) assay and trypan blue exclusion test, respectively, on mouse lymphoma cells. The results demonstrated that the single cell gel (comet) assay failed to detect DNA damage after a treatment of cells by MTA and Portland cements for concentrations up to 1000 mu g/ml. Similarly, results showed that none of the compounds tested were cytotoxic. Taken together, these results seem to indicate that MTA and Portland cements are not genotoxins and do not induce cellular death

Genotoxicity and cytotoxicity of mineral trioxide aggregate and regular and white Portland cements on Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells in vitro

Objective. Recently, mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and Portland cement have been used in dentistry as root-end-filling materials. However, the reported results concerning the biocompatibility of these materials are inconsistent. The goal of this study was to examine the genotoxicity and cytotoxicity of MTA and Portland cements in vitro by the single-cell gel (comet) assay and trypan blue exclusion test.Study design. Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells were exposed to MTA and regular and white Portland cements at final concentration ranging from 1 to 1000 mu g/mL for 1 h at 37 degrees C.Results. All compounds tested did not show genotoxic effects in all concentrations evaluated. No significant differences (P > .05) in cytotoxicity were observed for all compounds tested.Conclusions. Taken together, our results suggest that MTA and Portland cements are not genotoxins and are not able to induce cellular death