Comparative Effectiveness of Baricitinib Versus Tocilizumab in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19: A Retrospective Cohort Study of the National Covid Collaborative.
Asad E Patanwala, Xuya Xiao, Thomas E Hills, Alisa M Higgins, Colin J McArthur, G Caleb Alexander, Hemalkumar B Mehta
{"title":"Comparative Effectiveness of Baricitinib Versus Tocilizumab in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19: A Retrospective Cohort Study of the National Covid Collaborative.","authors":"Asad E Patanwala, Xuya Xiao, Thomas E Hills, Alisa M Higgins, Colin J McArthur, G Caleb Alexander, Hemalkumar B Mehta","doi":"10.1097/CCM.0000000000006444","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>COVID-19 treatment guidelines recommend baricitinib or tocilizumab for the management of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We compared the effectiveness of baricitinib vs. tocilizumab on mortality and clinical outcomes among hospitalized patients with COVID-19.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Multicenter, retrospective, propensity-weighted cohort study using a target trial emulation approach.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>The National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C), which is the largest electronic health records data on COVID-19 in the United States. The setting included 75 hospitals.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Adults who were hospitalized for COVID-19.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Newly initiated on baricitinib or tocilizumab.</p><p><strong>Measurements and main results: </strong>Our primary outcome was 28-day mortality. We used propensity scores with inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTWs) to control bias and confounding while comparing treatments. Among 10,661 individuals included in the study, 6,229 (58.4%) received baricitinib and 4,432 (41.6%) tocilizumab. Overall, the mean age of the cohort was 60.0 ± 15.1 years, 6429 (60.3%) were male, and 19.2% received invasive mechanical ventilation. After IPTW adjustment, baricitinib use was associated with lower 28-day mortality (odds ratio [OR], 0.91; 95% CI, 0.85-0.98) and hospital (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82-0.94) mortality compared with tocilizumab. Baricitinib was also associated with shorter hospital length of stay (incident rate ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.90-0.94) and lower rates of hospital-acquired infections (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75-0.99), although no difference in ICU length of stay was noted between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this large, diverse cohort of U.S. hospitalized adults with COVID-19, baricitinib was associated with significantly lower 28-day mortality, hospital mortality, shorter hospital length of stay, and less hospital-acquired infections compared with tocilizumab.</p>","PeriodicalId":10765,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000006444","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: COVID-19 treatment guidelines recommend baricitinib or tocilizumab for the management of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We compared the effectiveness of baricitinib vs. tocilizumab on mortality and clinical outcomes among hospitalized patients with COVID-19.
Design: Multicenter, retrospective, propensity-weighted cohort study using a target trial emulation approach.
Setting: The National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C), which is the largest electronic health records data on COVID-19 in the United States. The setting included 75 hospitals.
Patients: Adults who were hospitalized for COVID-19.
Interventions: Newly initiated on baricitinib or tocilizumab.
Measurements and main results: Our primary outcome was 28-day mortality. We used propensity scores with inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTWs) to control bias and confounding while comparing treatments. Among 10,661 individuals included in the study, 6,229 (58.4%) received baricitinib and 4,432 (41.6%) tocilizumab. Overall, the mean age of the cohort was 60.0 ± 15.1 years, 6429 (60.3%) were male, and 19.2% received invasive mechanical ventilation. After IPTW adjustment, baricitinib use was associated with lower 28-day mortality (odds ratio [OR], 0.91; 95% CI, 0.85-0.98) and hospital (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82-0.94) mortality compared with tocilizumab. Baricitinib was also associated with shorter hospital length of stay (incident rate ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.90-0.94) and lower rates of hospital-acquired infections (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75-0.99), although no difference in ICU length of stay was noted between the two groups.
Conclusions: In this large, diverse cohort of U.S. hospitalized adults with COVID-19, baricitinib was associated with significantly lower 28-day mortality, hospital mortality, shorter hospital length of stay, and less hospital-acquired infections compared with tocilizumab.
期刊介绍：
Critical Care Medicine is the premier peer-reviewed, scientific publication in critical care medicine. Directed to those specialists who treat patients in the ICU and CCU, including chest physicians, surgeons, pediatricians, pharmacists/pharmacologists, anesthesiologists, critical care nurses, and other healthcare professionals, Critical Care Medicine covers all aspects of acute and emergency care for the critically ill or injured patient.
Each issue presents critical care practitioners with clinical breakthroughs that lead to better patient care, the latest news on promising research, and advances in equipment and techniques.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
