Biological Subphenotypes of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Show Prognostic Enrichment in Mechanically Ventilated Patients without Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Rationale: Recent studies showed that biological subphenotypes in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) provide prognostic enrichment and show potential for predictive enrichment.Objectives: To determine whether these subphenotypes and their prognostic and potential for predictive enrichment could be extended to other patients in the ICU, irrespective of fulfilling the definition of ARDS.Methods: This is a secondary analysis of a prospective observational study of adult patients admitted to the ICU. We tested the prognostic enrichment of both cluster-derived and latentclass analysis (LCA)-derived biological ARDS subphenotypes by evaluating the association with clinical outcome (ICU-day, 30-day mortality, and ventilator-free days) using logistic regression and Cox regression analysis. We performed a principal component analysis to compare blood leukocyte gene expression profiles between subphenotypes and the presence of ARDS.Measurements and Main Results: We included 2,499 mechanically ventilated patients (674 with and 1,825 without ARDS). The cluster-derived "reactive" subphenotype was, independently of ARDS, significantly associated with a higher probability of ICU mortality, higher 30-day mortality, and a lower probability of successful extubation while alive compared with the "uninflamed" subphenotype. The blood leukocyte gene expression profiles of individual subphenotypes were similar for patients with and without ARDS. LCA-derived subphenotypes also showed similar profiles.Conclusions: The prognostic and potential for predictive enrichment of biological ARDS subphenotypes may be extended to mechanically ventilated critically ill patients without ARDS. Using the concept of biological subphenotypes for splitting cohorts of critically ill patients could add to improving future precision-based trial strategies and lead to identifying treatable traits for all critically ill patients

Visit-To-Visit Blood Pressure Variability and the Risk of Dementia in Older People

Item does not contain fulltex

Lower dementia risk with different classes of antihypertensive medication in older patients

Item does not contain fulltextOBJECTIVE: Use of antihypertensive medication (AHM) is potentially associated with a reduced risk of dementia. Both calcium channel blockers (CCBs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are suggested to have a more pronounced protective effect. We aimed to study the association between different classes of AHM and dementia in older people. METHODS: A subgroup of community-dwelling older people using AHM included in the 'Prevention of Dementia by Intensive Vascular Care' randomized controlled trial was studied. Incident dementia rates in participants with different AHM classes (mono and combination therapy) were compared with dementia rates in participants with any other AHM. RESULTS: At baseline, 1951 participants (55.3%) used AHM [mean age, 74.4 year (SD 2.5); mean SBP, 156.4 mmHg (SD 21.5)]. In total, 986 participants (50.5%) used beta-blockers, 798 diuretics (40.9%), 623 angiotensin- converting enzyme inhibitors (31.9%), 522 CCBs (26.8%), and 402 ARBs (20.6%). After 6.7 years (interquartile range 6.0-7.3) of follow-up, 136 participants (7.0%) developed dementia. Both use of CCBs [hazard ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.36-0.87] and ARBs (hazard ratio 0.60, 95% CI 0.37-0.98) were independently associated with a decreased risk of dementia. The association of CCBs with dementia was most apparent in participants without a history of cardiovascular disease (hazard ratio 0.38, 95% CI 0.18-0.81) and with uncontrolled hypertension (hazard ratio 0.26, 95% CI 0.11-0.61). SBP was not significantly lower in participants using CCBs or ARBs. CONCLUSION: Both use of CCBs and ARBs are independently associated with a decreased risk of dementia in older people

Personalised immunotherapy in sepsis: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION: Sepsis, a life-threatening organ dysfunction syndrome occurring in the context of severe infections, remains a major burden on global health with high morbidity and high mortality rates. Despite recent advances in the understanding of its pathophysiology, the treatment of sepsis remains supportive of nature with few interventions specifically designed for treating this complex syndrome. The focus of sepsis trials has increasingly shifted towards targeting excessive inflammation and immunosuppression using immunomodulatory agents. However, it remains uncertain how to identify patients that could benefit from such treatment, whether treatments can be tailored to an individual's immune profile, or at which stage of the disease the intervention should be initiated. In this scoping review, we provide a comprehensive overview of current available literature on immunostimulatory and immunosuppressive therapies against sepsis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The aim of this scoping review is to describe and summarise current literature evaluating immunotherapy in adult patients with sepsis. The review will be performed using the framework formulated by Arksey and O'Malley. A comprehensive literature and study collection will be executed by searching PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify clinical trials and cohort studies concerning immunotherapy in adult patients with sepsis. Screening will be performed independently and in duplicate by two reviewers who will also independently extract data into prespecified spreadsheets. We will summarise evidence in tabular format with descriptive statistics. The reported evidence will convey knowledge on the types of immunotherapies studied, and currently being studied, in adult patients with sepsis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval from a medical ethics committee is not required. Once completed, the review will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. These results will be of value to clinicians and researchers with an interest in advancing sepsis care. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ

Real-world Evidence of the Effects of Novel Treatments for COVID-19 on Mortality: A Nationwide Comparative Cohort Study of Hospitalized Patients in the First, Second, Third, and Fourth Waves in the Netherlands

Background Large clinical trials on drugs for hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients have shown significant effects on mortality. There may be a discrepancy with the observed real-world effect. We describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands during 4 pandemic waves and analyze the association of the newly introduced treatments with mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and discharge alive. Methods We conducted a nationwide retrospective analysis of hospitalized COVID-19 patients between February 27, 2020, and December 31, 2021. Patients were categorized into waves and into treatment groups (hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, neutralizing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 monoclonal antibodies, corticosteroids, and interleukin [IL]-6 antagonists). Four types of Cox regression analyses were used: unadjusted, adjusted, propensity matched, and propensity weighted. Results Among 5643 patients from 11 hospitals, we observed a changing epidemiology during 4 pandemic waves, with a decrease in median age (67-64 years; P < .001), in in-hospital mortality on the ward (21%-15%; P < .001), and a trend in the ICU (24%-16%; P = .148). In ward patients, hydroxychloroquine was associated with increased mortality (1.54; 95% CI, 1.22-1.96), and remdesivir was associated with a higher rate of discharge alive within 29 days (1.16; 95% CI, 1.03-1.31). Corticosteroids were associated with a decrease in mortality (0.82; 95% CI, 0.69-0.96); the results of IL-6 antagonists were inconclusive. In patients directly admitted to the ICU, hydroxychloroquine, corticosteroids, and IL-6 antagonists were not associated with decreased mortality. Conclusions Both remdesivir and corticosteroids were associated with better outcomes in ward patients with COVID-19. Continuous evaluation of real-world treatment effects is needed.Immunogenetics and cellular immunology of bacterial infectious disease

Real-world Evidence of the Effects of Novel Treatments for COVID-19 on Mortality: A Nationwide Comparative Cohort Study of Hospitalized Patients in the First, Second, Third, and Fourth Waves in the Netherlands

Background Large clinical trials on drugs for hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients have shown significant effects on mortality. There may be a discrepancy with the observed real-world effect. We describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands during 4 pandemic waves and analyze the association of the newly introduced treatments with mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and discharge alive. Methods We conducted a nationwide retrospective analysis of hospitalized COVID-19 patients between February 27, 2020, and December 31, 2021. Patients were categorized into waves and into treatment groups (hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, neutralizing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 monoclonal antibodies, corticosteroids, and interleukin [IL]-6 antagonists). Four types of Cox regression analyses were used: unadjusted, adjusted, propensity matched, and propensity weighted. Results Among 5643 patients from 11 hospitals, we observed a changing epidemiology during 4 pandemic waves, with a decrease in median age (67-64 years; P < .001), in in-hospital mortality on the ward (21%-15%; P < .001), and a trend in the ICU (24%-16%; P = .148). In ward patients, hydroxychloroquine was associated with increased mortality (1.54; 95% CI, 1.22-1.96), and remdesivir was associated with a higher rate of discharge alive within 29 days (1.16; 95% CI, 1.03-1.31). Corticosteroids were associated with a decrease in mortality (0.82; 95% CI, 0.69-0.96); the results of IL-6 antagonists were inconclusive. In patients directly admitted to the ICU, hydroxychloroquine, corticosteroids, and IL-6 antagonists were not associated with decreased mortality. Conclusions Both remdesivir and corticosteroids were associated with better outcomes in ward patients with COVID-19. Continuous evaluation of real-world treatment effects is needed

Selective decontamination of the digestive tract halves the prevalence of ventilator-associated pneumonia compared to selective oral decontamination

Intensive Car