Dipeptidyl peptidase-1 inhibition in patients hospitalised with COVID-19: a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial

Background Neutrophil serine proteases are involved in the pathogenesis of COVID-19 and increased serine protease activity has been reported in severe and fatal infection. We investigated whether brensocatib, an inhibitor of dipeptidyl peptidase-1 (DPP-1; an enzyme responsible for the activation of neutrophil serine proteases), would improve outcomes in patients hospitalised with COVID-19. Methods In a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial, across 14 hospitals in the UK, patients aged 16 years and older who were hospitalised with COVID-19 and had at least one risk factor for severe disease were randomly assigned 1:1, within 96 h of hospital admission, to once-daily brensocatib 25 mg or placebo orally for 28 days. Patients were randomly assigned via a central web-based randomisation system (TruST). Randomisation was stratified by site and age (65 years or ≥65 years), and within each stratum, blocks were of random sizes of two, four, or six patients. Participants in both groups continued to receive other therapies required to manage their condition. Participants, study staff, and investigators were masked to the study assignment. The primary outcome was the 7-point WHO ordinal scale for clinical status at day 29 after random assignment. The intention-to-treat population included all patients who were randomly assigned and met the enrolment criteria. The safety population included all participants who received at least one dose of study medication. This study was registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN30564012. Findings Between June 5, 2020, and Jan 25, 2021, 406 patients were randomly assigned to brensocatib or placebo; 192 (47·3%) to the brensocatib group and 214 (52·7%) to the placebo group. Two participants were excluded after being randomly assigned in the brensocatib group (214 patients included in the placebo group and 190 included in the brensocatib group in the intention-to-treat population). Primary outcome data was unavailable for six patients (three in the brensocatib group and three in the placebo group). Patients in the brensocatib group had worse clinical status at day 29 after being randomly assigned than those in the placebo group (adjusted odds ratio 0·72 [95% CI 0·57–0·92]). Prespecified subgroup analyses of the primary outcome supported the primary results. 185 participants reported at least one adverse event; 99 (46%) in the placebo group and 86 (45%) in the brensocatib group. The most common adverse events were gastrointestinal disorders and infections. One death in the placebo group was judged as possibly related to study drug. Interpretation Brensocatib treatment did not improve clinical status at day 29 in patients hospitalised with COVID-19

Extending thrombolysis to 4·5–9 h and wake-up stroke using perfusion imaging: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data

Background: Stroke thrombolysis with alteplase is currently recommended 0–4·5 h after stroke onset. We aimed to determine whether perfusion imaging can identify patients with salvageable brain tissue with symptoms 4·5 h or more from stroke onset or with symptoms on waking who might benefit from thrombolysis. Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data, we searched PubMed for randomised trials published in English between Jan 1, 2006, and March 1, 2019. We also reviewed the reference list of a previous systematic review of thrombolysis and searched ClinicalTrials.gov for interventional studies of ischaemic stroke. Studies of alteplase versus placebo in patients (aged ≥18 years) with ischaemic stroke treated more than 4·5 h after onset, or with wake-up stroke, who were imaged with perfusion-diffusion MRI or CT perfusion were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was excellent functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score 0–1) at 3 months, adjusted for baseline age and clinical severity. Safety outcomes were death and symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage. We calculated odds ratios, adjusted for baseline age and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, using mixed-effects logistic regression models. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42019128036. Findings: We identified three trials that met eligibility criteria: EXTEND, ECASS4-EXTEND, and EPITHET. Of the 414 patients included in the three trials, 213 (51%) were assigned to receive alteplase and 201 (49%) were assigned to receive placebo. Overall, 211 patients in the alteplase group and 199 patients in the placebo group had mRS assessment data at 3 months and thus were included in the analysis of the primary outcome. 76 (36%) of 211 patients in the alteplase group and 58 (29%) of 199 patients in the placebo group had achieved excellent functional outcome at 3 months (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1·86, 95% CI 1·15–2·99, p=0·011). Symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage was more common in the alteplase group than the placebo group (ten [5%] of 213 patients vs one [<1%] of 201 patients in the placebo group; adjusted OR 9·7, 95% CI 1·23–76·55, p=0·031). 29 (14%) of 213 patients in the alteplase group and 18 (9%) of 201 patients in the placebo group died (adjusted OR 1·55, 0·81–2·96, p=0·66). Interpretation: Patients with ischaemic stroke 4·5–9 h from stroke onset or wake-up stroke with salvageable brain tissue who were treated with alteplase achieved better functional outcomes than did patients given placebo. The rate of symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage was higher with alteplase, but this increase did not negate the overall net benefit of thrombolysis