Patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 outcomes on remdesivir according to baseline 4C mortality score

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Jacob Sellers , Jongwha Chang , Jessica Jones , Trager D. Hintze
{"title":"Patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 outcomes on remdesivir according to baseline 4C mortality score","authors":"Jacob Sellers ,&nbsp;Jongwha Chang ,&nbsp;Jessica Jones ,&nbsp;Trager D. Hintze","doi":"10.1016/j.pupt.2022.102188","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Remdesivir was the first antiviral to show clinical benefit in patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19. Previous trials demonstrated a faster time to recovery in hospitalized patients treated with remdesivir vs placebo. Current guidelines recommend treatment with remdesivir based on hospitalization status, oxygen requirements, and time from symptom onset. However, other factors may be evaluated to determine disease severity and risk for progression. The 4C mortality score is a validated, eight variable score that may be used to categorize patients by mortality risk at the time of hospital admission for COVID pneumonia. The objective of this study was to determine if the 4C mortality score may be used to predict which patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 would benefit the most from remdesivir at the time of hospital admission.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This was a single-center retrospective cohort study comparing time to recovery among hospitalized patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 who were treated with remdesivir compared to those who were treated with standard of care (SOC). The primary outcome was time to recovery, defined as discharge from the hospital or no longer requiring supplemental oxygen, stratified by the 4C mortality score risk group. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality, hospital length of stay, and time to recovery in patients who were started on remdesivir within 7 days from symptom onset vs after 7 days from symptom onset. A survival analysis was used to analyze time to recovery outcomes.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Data was collected and analyzed for a total of 300 patients, of which 200 received remdesivir and 100 received SOC. Patients in the remdesivir group had a longer time to recovery compared to patients in the SOC group (6 days vs 4 days). This finding was driven by patients who were categorized to the intermediate risk and high risk mortality groups. Additionally, patients who received remdesivir had a longer length of hospital stay compared to those who received SOC (12 days vs 9 days). Remdesivir was not associated with an increased rate of adverse events.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This study of patients admitted with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 found that patients who were treated with remdesivir had a longer time to recovery and a longer length of stay compared to those who received SOC. These findings add to the body of evidence questioning the benefit of remdesivir therapy among patients hospitalized with COVID-19.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":20799,"journal":{"name":"Pulmonary pharmacology & therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9806928/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pulmonary pharmacology & therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1094553922000797","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background

Remdesivir was the first antiviral to show clinical benefit in patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19. Previous trials demonstrated a faster time to recovery in hospitalized patients treated with remdesivir vs placebo. Current guidelines recommend treatment with remdesivir based on hospitalization status, oxygen requirements, and time from symptom onset. However, other factors may be evaluated to determine disease severity and risk for progression. The 4C mortality score is a validated, eight variable score that may be used to categorize patients by mortality risk at the time of hospital admission for COVID pneumonia. The objective of this study was to determine if the 4C mortality score may be used to predict which patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 would benefit the most from remdesivir at the time of hospital admission.

Methods

This was a single-center retrospective cohort study comparing time to recovery among hospitalized patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 who were treated with remdesivir compared to those who were treated with standard of care (SOC). The primary outcome was time to recovery, defined as discharge from the hospital or no longer requiring supplemental oxygen, stratified by the 4C mortality score risk group. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality, hospital length of stay, and time to recovery in patients who were started on remdesivir within 7 days from symptom onset vs after 7 days from symptom onset. A survival analysis was used to analyze time to recovery outcomes.

Results

Data was collected and analyzed for a total of 300 patients, of which 200 received remdesivir and 100 received SOC. Patients in the remdesivir group had a longer time to recovery compared to patients in the SOC group (6 days vs 4 days). This finding was driven by patients who were categorized to the intermediate risk and high risk mortality groups. Additionally, patients who received remdesivir had a longer length of hospital stay compared to those who received SOC (12 days vs 9 days). Remdesivir was not associated with an increased rate of adverse events.

Conclusions

This study of patients admitted with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 found that patients who were treated with remdesivir had a longer time to recovery and a longer length of stay compared to those who received SOC. These findings add to the body of evidence questioning the benefit of remdesivir therapy among patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

根据基线4C死亡率评分,中度至重度COVID-19患者接受瑞德西韦治疗的结果
背景Remdesivir是第一种在中重度新冠肺炎患者中显示临床益处的抗病毒药物。先前的试验表明,与安慰剂相比,接受瑞德西韦治疗的住院患者恢复时间更快。目前的指南建议根据住院状态、氧气需求和症状出现时间使用瑞德西韦进行治疗。然而,可以评估其他因素来确定疾病的严重程度和进展风险。4C死亡率评分是一种经过验证的八变量评分,可用于根据新冠肺炎住院时的死亡率风险对患者进行分类。本研究的目的是确定4C死亡率评分是否可用于预测哪些中重度新冠肺炎患者在入院时从瑞德西韦中获益最多。方法这是一项单中心回顾性队列研究,比较了接受瑞德西韦治疗的中重度新冠肺炎住院患者与接受标准护理(SOC)治疗的患者的康复时间。主要结果是恢复时间,定义为出院或不再需要补充氧气,按4C死亡率评分风险组进行分层。次要结果包括在症状出现后7天内开始服用瑞德西韦的患者的住院死亡率、住院时间和恢复时间,而不是在症状出现7天后。使用生存率分析来分析恢复时间的结果。结果收集并分析了300名患者的数据,其中200名患者接受了瑞德西韦治疗,100名患者接受SOC治疗。与SOC组患者相比,瑞德西韦组患者的恢复时间更长(6天vs 4天)。这一发现是由被分为中风险和高风险死亡率组的患者推动的。此外,与接受SOC的患者相比,接受瑞德西韦的患者住院时间更长(12天vs 9天)。瑞德西韦与不良事件发生率增加无关。结论这项针对中重度新冠肺炎住院患者的研究发现,与接受SOC治疗的患者相比,接受瑞德西韦治疗的患者恢复时间更长,住院时间更长。这些发现为质疑瑞德西韦疗法在新冠肺炎住院患者中的益处提供了大量证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
审稿时长
42 days
期刊介绍: Pulmonary Pharmacology and Therapeutics (formerly Pulmonary Pharmacology) is concerned with lung pharmacology from molecular to clinical aspects. The subject matter encompasses the major diseases of the lung including asthma, cystic fibrosis, pulmonary circulation, ARDS, carcinoma, bronchitis, emphysema and drug delivery. Laboratory and clinical research on man and animals will be considered including studies related to chemotherapy of cancer, tuberculosis and infection. In addition to original research papers the journal will include review articles and book reviews. Research Areas Include: • All major diseases of the lung • Physiology • Pathology • Drug delivery • Metabolism • Pulmonary Toxicology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信