Alteration of Lung Physiology with the Administration of Convalescent Plasma in ARDS Patients Intubated with COVID-19 Pneumonia

**Background:** It remains unknown to what degree lung physiology is altered by administration of convalescent plasma in patients intubated with ARDS due to COVID-19 pneumonia. Although no longer clinically used as treatment for COVID-19, convalescent plasma therapy could be deployed again should new virus threats emerge in the future. **Aim:** To evaluate changes in ventilator physiologic variables in response to convalescent plasma transfusion using a retrospective, observational, case control study of intubated patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. **Methods:** Patients who were receiving mechanical ventilation due to COVID-19 at the time of administration of convalescent plasma therapy (CPT) were matched to control patients who did not receive convalescent plasma. Ventilatory data such as compliance, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), FiO~2~ administered, PaO~2~/FiO~2~ ratio, and tidal volume were collected pre and post administration. Panel-level random-effects linear regression models were used to assess the mean difference and interactions between CPT and cases vs controls over time. **Results:** 12 patients received CPT while intubated and were matched to 35 intubated control patients who did not receive CPT. In total, 857 separate measurements of static compliance were obtained over time. No significant difference in static compliance was seen after CPT. In cases, adjusted mean static compliance was 30.8 (95% CI (23.3, 38.4))mL/cm H~2~O before CPT and 28.2 (95% CI (20.7,35.6)) mL/cm H~2~O afterwards. Controls adjusted mean static compliance was 33.9 (95% CI (29.5, 38.4)) mL/cm H~2~O before versus 32.2 (95% CI (27.9, 36.5)) mL/cm H~2~O afterwards. Variables that had small but statistically significant differences pre vs post CPT among cases and controls were systolic and diastolic blood pressure, FiO~2~, heart rate, applied PEEP, and respiratory rate. **Conclusion:** While some statistically significant physiologic effects were seen with CPT in mechanically ventilated patients, these were deemed to be small and clinically insignificant. This is consistent with prior research on less acutely ill COVID-19 patients

Vascular pedicle width in acute lung injury: correlation with intravascular pressures and ability to discriminate fluid status

Abstract Introduction Conservative fluid management in patients with acute lung injury (ALI) increases time alive and free from mechanical ventilation. Vascular pedicle width (VPW) is a non-invasive measurement of intravascular volume status. The VPW was studied in ALI patients to determine the correlation between VPW and intravascular pressure measurements and whether VPW could predict fluid status. Methods This retrospective cohort study involved 152 patients with ALI enrolled in the Fluid and Catheter Treatment Trial (FACTT) from five NHLBI ARDS (Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome) Network sites. VPW and central venous pressure (CVP) or pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (PAOP) from the first four study days were correlated. The relationships between VPW, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), cumulative fluid balance, and PAOP were also evaluated. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were used to determine the ability of VPW to detect PAOP <8 mmHg and PAOP ≥18 mm Hg. Results A total of 71 and 152 patients provided 118 and 276 paired VPW/PAOP and VPW/CVP measurements, respectively. VPW correlated with PAOP (r = 0.41; P < 0.001) and less well with CVP (r = 0.21; P = 0.001). In linear regression, VPW correlated with PAOP 1.5-fold better than cumulative fluid balance and 2.5-fold better than PEEP. VPW discriminated achievement of PAOP <8 mm Hg (AUC = 0.73; P = 0.04) with VPW ≤67 mm demonstrating 71% sensitivity (95% CI 30 to 95%) and 68% specificity (95% CI 59 to 75%). For discriminating a hydrostatic component of the edema (that is, PAOP ≥18 mm Hg), VPW ≥72 mm demonstrated 61.4% sensitivity (95% CI 47 to 74%) and 61% specificity (49 to 71%) (area under the curve (AUC) 0.69; P = 0.001). Conclusions VPW correlates with PAOP better than CVP in patients with ALI. Due to its only moderate sensitivity and specificity, the ability of VPW to discriminate fluid status in patients with acute lung injury is limited and should only be considered when intravascular pressures are unavailable

Update to the study protocol for an implementation-effectiveness trial comparing two education strategies for improving the uptake of noninvasive ventilation in patients with severe COPD exacerbation

BACKGROUND: There is strong evidence that noninvasive ventilation (NIV) improves the outcomes of patients hospitalized with severe COPD exacerbation, and NIV is recommended as the first-line therapy for these patients. Yet, several studies have demonstrated substantial variation in NIV use across hospitals, leading to preventable morbidity and mortality. In addition, prior studies suggested that efforts to increase NIV use in COPD need to account for the complex and interdisciplinary nature of NIV delivery and the need for team coordination. Therefore, our initial project aimed to compare two educational strategies: online education (OLE) and interprofessional education (IPE), which targets complex team-based care in NIV delivery. Due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on recruitment and planned intervention, we had made several changes in the study design, statistical analysis, and implementation strategies delivery as outlined in the methods. METHODS: We originally proposed a two-arm, pragmatic, cluster, randomized hybrid implementation-effectiveness trial comparing two education strategies to improve NIV uptake in patients with severe COPD exacerbation in 20 hospitals with a low baseline rate of NIV use. Due to logistical constrains and slow recruitment, we changed the study design to an opened cohort stepped-wedge design with three steps which will allow the institutions to enroll when they are ready to participate. Only the IPE strategy will be implemented, and the education will be provided in an online virtual format. Our primary outcome will be the hospital-level risk-standardized NIV proportion for the period post-IPE training, along with the change in rate from the period prior to training. Aim 1 will compare the change over time of NIV use among patients with COPD in the step-wedged design. Aim 2 will explore the mediators\u27 role (respiratory therapist autonomy and team functionality) on the relationship between the implementation strategies and effectiveness. Finally, in Aim 3, through interviews with providers, we will assess the acceptability and feasibility of the educational training. CONCLUSION: The changes in study design will result in several limitation. Most importantly, the hospitals in the three cohorts are not randomized as they enroll based on their readiness. Second, the delivery of the IPE is virtual, and it is not known if remote education is conducive to team building. However, this study will be among the first to test the impact of IPE in the inpatient setting carefully and may generalize to other interventions directed to seriously ill patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04206735 . Registered on December 20, 2019

A phase I study evaluating the pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability of an antibody-based tissue factor antagonist in subjects with acute lung injury or acute respiratory distress syndrome

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The tissue factor (TF)-dependent extrinsic pathway has been suggested to be a central mechanism by which the coagulation cascade is locally activated in the lungs of patients with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ALI/ARDS) and thus represents an attractive target for therapeutic intervention. This study was designed to determine the pharmacokinetic and safety profiles of ALT-836, an anti-TF antibody, in patients with ALI/ARDS.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This was a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation Phase I clinical trial in adult patients who had suspected or proven infection, were receiving mechanical ventilation and had ALI/ARDS (PaO₂/FiO₂≤ 300 mm). Eighteen patients (6 per cohort) were randomized in a 5:1 ratio to receive ALT-836 or placebo, and were treated within 48 hours after meeting screening criteria. Cohorts of patients were administered a single intravenously dose of 0.06, 0.08 or 0.1 mg/kg ALT-836 or placebo. Blood samples were taken for pharmacokinetic and immunogenicity measurements. Safety was assessed by adverse events, vital signs, ECGs, laboratory, coagulation and pulmonary function parameters.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Pharmacokinetic analysis showed a dose dependent exposure to ALT-836 across the infusion range of 0.06 to 0.1 mg/kg. No anti-ALT-836 antibody response was observed in the study population during the trial. No major bleeding episodes were reported in the ALT-836 treated patients. The most frequent adverse events were anemia, observed in both placebo and ALT-836 treated patients, and ALT-836 dose dependent, self-resolved hematuria, which suggested 0.08 mg/kg as an acceptable dose level of ALT-836 in this patient population.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Overall, this study showed that ALT-836 could be safely administered to patients with sepsis-induced ALI/ARDS.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov: <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01438853">NCT01438853</a></p

Obesity does not alter the pharmacokinetics of drotrecogin alfa (activated) in severe sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Drotrecogin alfa (activated) [DrotAA] is approved for the reduction of mortality in adults with severe sepsis (sepsis with acute organ dysfunction) and high risk of death. Patients whose actual body weight was \u3e135 kg were excluded from th

Drotrecogin alfa (activated) for adults with severe sepsis and a low risk of death.

BACKGROUND: In November 2001, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA) for adults who had severe sepsis and a high risk of death. The FDA required a study to evaluate the efficacy of DrotAA for adults who had

mRNA Vaccine Effectiveness Against COVID-19 Hospitalization Among Solid Organ Transplant Recipients

Background: The study objective was to evaluate 2 and 3 dose COVID-19 mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) in preventing COVID-19 hospitalization among adult solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. Methods: 21-site case-control analysis of 10,425 adults hospitalized March-December 2021. Cases were hospitalized with COVID-19; controls were hospitalized for an alternative diagnosis (SARS-CoV-2 negative). Participants were classified as: SOT recipient (n=440), other immunocompromising condition (n=1684), or immunocompetent (n=8301). VE against COVID-19 associated hospitalization was calculated as 1-adjusted odds ratio of prior vaccination among cases compared with controls. Results: Among SOT recipients, VE was 29% (95% CI: -19 to 58%) for 2 doses and 77% (95% CI: 48 to 90%) for 3 doses. Among patients with other immunocompromising conditions, VE was 72% (95% CI: 64 to 79%) for 2 doses and 92% (95% CI: 85 to 95%) for 3 doses. Among immunocompetent patients, VE was 88% (95% CI: 87 to 90%) for 2 doses and 96% (95% CI: 83 to 99%) for 3 doses. Conclusion: Effectiveness of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines was lower for SOT recipients than immunocompetent people and those with other immunocompromising conditions. Among SOT recipients, vaccination with 3 doses of an mRNA vaccine led to substantially greater protection than 2 doses. Keywords: COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; immunocompromised; solid organ transplantation; vaccination; vaccine effectiveness

Prognostic Language in Critical Neurologic Illness: A Multicenter Mixed-Methods Study

Background and objectives: There are no evidence-based guidelines for discussing prognosis in critical neurologic illness, but in general, experts recommend that clinicians communicate prognosis using estimates, such as numerical or qualitative expressions of risk. Little is known about how real-world clinicians communicate prognosis in critical neurologic illness. Our primary objective was to characterize prognostic language clinicians used in critical neurologic illness. We additionally explored whether prognostic language differed between prognostic domains (e.g., survival, cognition). Methods: We conducted a multi-center cross-sectional mixed-methods study analyzing de-identified transcripts of audio-recorded clinician-family meetings for patients with neurologic illness requiring intensive care (e.g., intracerebral hemorrhage, traumatic brain injury, severe stroke) from seven U.S. Centers: Two coders assigned prognostic language type and domain of prognosis to each clinician prognostic statement. Prognostic language was coded as probabilistic (estimating the likelihood of an outcome occurring, e.g., 80% survive ; She\u27ll probably survive ) or non-probabilistic (characterizing outcomes without offering likelihood; e.g., She may not survive ). We applied univariate and multivariable binomial logistic regression to examine independent associations between prognostic language and domain of prognosis. Results: We analyzed 43 clinician-family meetings for 39 patients with 78 surrogates and 27 clinicians. Clinicians made 512 statements about survival (median 0/meeting [IQR 0;2]), physical function (median 2[IQR 0;7]), cognition (median 2[IQR 0;6]) and overall recovery (median 2[IQR 1;4]). Most statements were non-probabilistic (316/512 [62%]), 10/512(2%) of prognostic statements offered numeric estimates, and 21% (9/43) of family meetings only contained nonprobabilistic language. Compared to statements about cognition, statements about survival (OR 2.50[95% CI 1.01, 6.18]; p=0.048) and physical function (OR 3.22[1.77, 5.86]; p\u3c0.001) were more frequently probabilistic. Statements about physical function were less likely to be uncertainty-based than statements about cognition (OR 0.34 [95% CI 0.17-0.66]; p=0.002). Discussion: Clinicians preferred not to use estimates (either numeric or qualitative) when discussing critical neurologic illness prognosis, especially when they discussed cognitive outcomes. These findings may inform interventions to improve prognostic communication in critical neurologic illness