Search

Rationale: Acute lung injury (ALI) is a debilitating condition associated with severe skeletal muscle weakness that persists in humans long after lung injury has resolved. The molecular mechanisms underlying this condition are unknown.Objectives: To identify the muscle-specific molecular mechanisms responsible for muscle wasting in a mouse model of ALI.Methods: Changes in skeletal muscle weight, fiber size, in vivo contractile performance, and expression of mRNAs and proteins encoding muscle atrophy-associated genes for muscle ring finger-1 (MuRF1) and atrogin1 were measured. Genetic inactivation of MuRF1 or electroporation-mediated transduction of miRNA-based short hairpin RNAs targeting either MuRF1 or atrogin1 were used to identify their role in ALI-associated skeletal muscle wasting.Measurements and Main Results: Mice with ALI developed profound muscle atrophy and preferential loss of muscle contractile proteins associated with reduced muscle function in vivo. Although mRNA expression of the muscle-specific ubiquitin ligases, MuRF1 and atrogin1, was increased in ALI mice, only MuRF1 protein levels were up-regulated. Consistent with these changes, suppression of MuRF1 by genetic or biochemical approaches prevented muscle fiber atrophy, whereas suppression of atrogin1 expression was without effect. Despite resolution of lung injury and down-regulation of MuRF1 and atrogin1, force generation in ALI mice remained suppressed.Conclusions: These data show that MuRF1 is responsible for mediating muscle atrophy that occurs during the period of active lung injury in ALI mice and that, as in humans, skeletal muscle dysfunction persists despite resolution of lung injury. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Skeletal muscle dysfunction in critical illnesses leaves survivors weak and functionally impaired. Macrophages infiltrate muscles; however, their functional role is unclear. We aim to examine muscle leukocyte composition and the effect of macrophages on muscle mass and function in the murine acute lung injury (ALI)-associated skeletal muscle wasting model. We performed flow cytometry of hindlimb muscle to identify myeloid cells pre-injury and time points up to 29 days after intratracheal lipopolysaccharide ALI. We evaluated muscle force and morphometrics after systemic and intramuscular clodronate-induced macrophage depletions between peak lung injury and recovery (day 5-6) versus vehicle control. Our results show muscle leukocytes changed over ALI course with day 3 neutrophil infiltration (130.5 ± 95.6cells/mg control to 236.3 ± 70.6cells/mg day 3) and increased day 10 monocyte abundance (5.0 ± 3.4%CD45 + CD11b + day 3 to 14.0 ± 2.6%CD45 + CD11b + day 10, p = 0.005). Although macrophage count did not significantly change, pro-inflammatory (27.0 ± 7.2% day 3 to 7.2 ± 3.8% day 10, p = 0.02) and anti-inflammatory (30.5 ± 11.1% day 3 to 52.7 ± 9.7% day 10, p = 0.09) surface marker expression changed over the course of ALI. Macrophage depletion following peak lung injury increased muscle mass and force generation. These data suggest muscle macrophages beyond peak lung injury limit or delay muscle recovery. Targeting macrophages could augment muscle recovery following lung injury., (© 2024 The Author(s). Physiological Reports published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The Physiological Society and the American Physiological Society.)

Importance: Acetaminophen (paracetamol) has many pharmacological effects that might be beneficial in sepsis, including inhibition of cell-free hemoglobin-induced oxidation of lipids and other substrates., Objective: To determine whether acetaminophen increases days alive and free of organ dysfunction in sepsis compared with placebo., Design, Setting, and Participants: Phase 2b randomized, double-blind, clinical trial conducted from October 2021 to April 2023 with 90-day follow-up. Adults with sepsis and respiratory or circulatory organ dysfunction were enrolled in the emergency department or intensive care unit of 40 US academic hospitals within 36 hours of presentation., Intervention: Patients were randomized to 1 g of acetaminophen intravenously every 6 hours or placebo for 5 days., Main Outcome and Measures: The primary end point was days alive and free of organ support (mechanical ventilation, vasopressors, and kidney replacement therapy) to day 28. Treatment effect modification was evaluated for acetaminophen by prerandomization plasma cell-free hemoglobin level higher than 10 mg/dL., Results: Of 447 patients enrolled (mean age, 64 [SD, 15] years, 51% female, mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment [SOFA] score, 5.4 [SD, 2.5]), 227 were randomized to acetaminophen and 220 to placebo. Acetaminophen was safe with no difference in liver enzymes, hypotension, or fluid balance between treatment arms. Days alive and free of organ support to day 28 were not meaningfully different for acetaminophen (20.2 days; 95% CI, 18.8 to 21.6) vs placebo (19.6 days; 95% CI, 18.2 to 21.0; P = .56; difference, 0.6; 95% CI, -1.4 to 2.6). Among 15 secondary outcomes, total, respiratory, and coagulation SOFA scores were significantly lower on days 2 through 4 in the acetaminophen arm as was the rate of development of acute respiratory distress syndrome within 7 days (2.2% vs 8.5% acetaminophen vs placebo; P = .01; difference, -6.3; 95% CI, -10.8 to -1.8). There was no significant interaction between cell-free hemoglobin levels and acetaminophen., Conclusions and Relevance: Intravenous acetaminophen was safe but did not significantly improve days alive and free of organ support in critically ill sepsis patients., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04291508.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is associated with long-term impairments in brain and muscle function that significantly impact the quality of life of those who survive the acute illness. The mechanisms underlying these impairments are not yet well understood, and evidence-based interventions to minimize the burden on patients remain unproved. The NHLBI of the NIH assembled a workshop in April 2023 to review the state of the science regarding ARDS-associated brain and muscle dysfunction, to identify gaps in current knowledge, and to determine priorities for future investigation. The workshop included presentations by scientific leaders across the translational science spectrum and was open to the public as well as the scientific community. This report describes the themes discussed at the workshop as well as recommendations to advance the field toward the goal of improving the health and well-being of ARDS survivors.

Objectives: To assess the in vitro IntelliSep test, a microfluidic assay that quantifies the state of immune activation by evaluating the biophysical properties of leukocytes, as a rapid diagnostic for sepsis., Design: Prospective cohort study., Setting: Five emergency departments (EDs) in Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, and Washington., Patients: Adult patients presenting to the ED with signs (two of four Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome criteria, where one must be temperature or WBC count) or suspicion (provider-ordered culture) of infection., Interventions: All patients underwent testing with the IntelliSep using ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid-anticoagulated whole blood followed by retrospective adjudication for sepsis by sepsis-3 criteria by a blinded panel of physicians., Measurements and Main Results: Of 599 patients enrolled, 572 patients were included in the final analysis. The result of the IntelliSep test is reported as the IntelliSep Index (ISI), ranging from 0.1 to 10.0, divided into three interpretation bands for the risk of sepsis: band 1 (low) to band 3 (high). The median turnaround time for ISI results was 7.2 minutes. The ISI resulted band 1 in 252 (44.1%), band 2 in 160 (28.0%), and band 3 in 160 (28.0%). Sepsis occurred in 26.6% (152 of 572 patients). Sepsis prevalence was 11.1% (95% CI, 7.5-15.7%) in band 1, 28.1% (95% CI, 21.3-35.8%) in band 2, and 49.4% (95% CI, 41.4-57.4%) in band 3. The Positive Percent Agreement of band 1 was 81.6% and the Negative Percent Agreement of band 3 was 80.7%, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.74. Compared with band 1, band 3 correlated with adverse clinical outcomes, including mortality, and resource utilization., Conclusions: Increasing ISI interpretation band is associated with increasing probability of sepsis in patients presenting to the ED with suspected infection., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Society of Critical Care Medicine.)

Respiratory failure is a common and potentially life-threatening complication of neuromuscular diseases. Prompt recognition and accurate diagnosis of new or worsening chronic neuromuscular disease have important clinical management and prognostic implications. In this article, we present an approach to the acute presentation of undifferentiated neuromuscular respiratory failure in the ICU and guidance for determination and respiratory management of the underlying disorder., Competing Interests: Financial/Nonfinancial Disclosures The authors have reported to CHEST the following: J. B. C. has a grant from Catalyst Pharmaceuticals Inc and receives clinical trial support from MTB Pharma Inc and Amylyx Pharmaceuticals. The institution receives funding on behalf of D. C. F. from NIH, CDC, and Quantum Leap Healthcare Collaborative. D. C. F. has worked as a consultant for Cytovale and Medpace. None declared (J. T. W. K., A. C.)., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

On June 21, 2023, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccination for adults aged ≥60 years, offered to individual adults using shared clinical decision-making. Informed use of these vaccines requires an understanding of RSV disease severity. To characterize RSV-associated severity, 5,784 adults aged ≥60 years hospitalized with acute respiratory illness and laboratory-confirmed RSV, SARS-CoV-2, or influenza infection were prospectively enrolled from 25 hospitals in 20 U.S. states during February 1, 2022-May 31, 2023. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare RSV disease severity with COVID-19 and influenza severity on the basis of the following outcomes: 1) standard flow (<30 L/minute) oxygen therapy, 2) high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) or noninvasive ventilation (NIV), 3) intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and 4) invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or death. Overall, 304 (5.3%) enrolled adults were hospitalized with RSV, 4,734 (81.8%) with COVID-19 and 746 (12.9%) with influenza. Patients hospitalized with RSV were more likely to receive standard flow oxygen, HFNC or NIV, and ICU admission than were those hospitalized with COVID-19 or influenza. Patients hospitalized with RSV were more likely to receive IMV or die compared with patients hospitalized with influenza (adjusted odds ratio = 2.08; 95% CI = 1.33-3.26). Among hospitalized older adults, RSV was less common, but was associated with more severe disease than COVID-19 or influenza. High disease severity in older adults hospitalized with RSV is important to consider in shared clinical decision-making regarding RSV vaccination., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Samuel M. Brown reports that ReddyPort pays royalties on his invention of an airway device, outside the submitted work. Jonathan D. Casey reports a travel grant from Fisher and Paykel, outside the submitted work. Steven Y. Chang reports consulting fees from PureTech Health and Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals and participation as a data safety monitoring board member for a study at University of California, Los Angeles outside the submitted work. James D. Chappell reports participating as a coinvestigator for a Merck investigator studies program, where he supported surveillance of respiratory syncytial virus infection among hospitalized children in Jordan, outside the submitted work. Manjusha Gaglani reports grants from Abt Associates and Westat, having served as cochair of the Infectious Diseases and Immunization Committee for the Texas Pediatric Society (TPS), and receiving an honorarium for serving as a TPS Project Firstline webinar speaker panelist for Respiratory Virus Review: Clinical Considerations and IPC Guidance, outside the submitted work. Adit A. Ginde reports receiving grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Defense, AbbVie, and Faron Pharmaceuticals outside the submitted work. Michelle N. Gong reports a grant from NIH outside the submitted work. Carlos G. Grijalva reports grants from NIH, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Food and Drug Administration, and Syneos Health, and receipt of compensation for participation in an advisory board for Merck outside the submitted work. Natasha Halasa reports receiving grants from Sanofi, Merck, and Quidel outside the submitted work. Akram Khan reports receiving grants from United Therapeutics, Johnson & Johnson, 4D Medical, Eli Lily, Dompe Pharmaceuticals, and GSK outside the submitted work. Adam S. Lauring reports receiving grants from FluLab, NIH/National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and Burroughs Wellcome Fund and fees from Sanofi and Roche for consulting on oseltamivir and baloxavir respectively, outside the submitted work. Emily T. Martin reports a grant from Merck outside the submitted work. Christopher Mallow reports medical legal consulting outside the submitted work. Ithan D. Peltan reports grants from NIH and Janssen Pharmaceuticals and institutional support from Asahi Kasei Pharma and Regeneron outside the submitted work. Mayur Ramesh reports participating in a nonbranded speaker program supported by AstraZeneca and serving on an advisory board for Moderna outside the submitted work. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Objective: To explore if patient characteristics (pre-existing comorbidity, age, sex, and illness severity) modify the effect of physical rehabilitation (intervention vs control) for the coprimary outcomes health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and objective physical performance using pooled individual patient data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs)., Data Sources: Data of individual patients from four critical care physical rehabilitation RCTs., Study Selection: Eligible trials were identified from a published systematic review., Data Extraction: Data sharing agreements were executed permitting transfer of anonymized data of individual patients from four trials to form one large, combined dataset. The pooled trial data were analyzed with linear mixed models fitted with fixed effects for treatment group, time, and trial., Data Synthesis: Four trials contributed data resulting in a combined total of 810 patients (intervention n = 403, control n = 407). After receiving trial rehabilitation interventions, patients with two or more comorbidities had HRQoL scores that were significantly higher and exceeded the minimal important difference at 3 and 6 months compared with the similarly comorbid control group (based on the Physical Component Summary score (Wald test p = 0.041). Patients with one or no comorbidities who received intervention had no HRQoL outcome differences at 3 and 6 months when compared with similarly comorbid control patients. No patient characteristic modified the physical performance outcome in patients who received physical rehabilitation., Conclusions: The identification of a target group with two or more comorbidities who derived benefits from the trial interventions is an important finding and provides direction for future investigations into the effect of rehabilitation. The multimorbid post-ICU population may be a select population for future prospective investigations into the effect of physical rehabilitation., Competing Interests: Dr. Puthucheary reports honorarium and speaker fees from Baxter, Faraday Pharmaceuticals, Lyric Pharmaceuticals, Fresenius-Kabi, Nestle, Orion, GlaxoSmithKline, and Nutritica. Dr. Files reports consulting fees from Cytovale. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

Background: Survivors of critical illness are at risk for post-intensive care syndrome (PICS, comprised of physical dysfunction, cognitive impairment, and neuropsychiatric disorders including anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress). Their family members and caregivers are at risk for PICS-F (PICS-family, comprised of anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress). PICS and PICS-F are increasingly recognized in critical care; however, the awareness among primary providers of the domains and the terms of PICS/PICS-F is unknown. Objectives: To determine current practice patterns and knowledge among primary care physicians in regards to patients recovering from critical illness; to determine barriers to care of post-critically ill patients. Methods: A paper and electronic survey were developed and randomly distributed to a subset of North Carolina primary care physicians. Survey questions consisted of the following domains: demographics, current practice, barriers to providing care, knowledge of common issues/complications following critical illness, and interest in changing care for survivors of critical illness. Results: One hundred and ninety-six surveys were delivered and 77 completed surveys (39% response rate) were analyzed. Respondents confirmed significant barriers to care of post-critically ill patients including lack of awareness of PICS/PICS-F terminology, insufficient time to spend with patients, and inadequate education of patients/families about recovery after critical illness. Fifty-seven percent of respondents thought a specialized transitional post-ICU clinic would be helpful. Sixty-two percent reported feeling comfortable caring for patients after a critical illness and 75% felt they were aware of common problems encountered after critical illness. However, 84% also thought more education about PICS/PICS-F would be helpful as would a list of common problems seen after critical illness (91%). Conclusions: Significant gaps and barriers to providing optimal post-ICU care by PCPs exist. Providers identified time constraints and educational gaps as domains needing attention. Dedicated post-ICU clinics might provide a bridge to transition care post-critical illness back to primary care providers.

Background: Cardiac function of critically ill patients with COVID-19 generally has been reported from clinically obtained data. Echocardiographic deformation imaging can identify ventricular dysfunction missed by traditional echocardiographic assessment., Research Question: What is the prevalence of ventricular dysfunction and what are its implications for the natural history of critical COVID-19?, Study Design and Methods: This is a multicenter prospective cohort of critically ill patients with COVID-19. We performed serial echocardiography and lower extremity vascular ultrasound on hospitalization days 1, 3, and 8. We defined left ventricular (LV) dysfunction as the absolute value of longitudinal strain of < 17% or left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) of < 50%. Primary clinical outcome was inpatient survival., Results: We enrolled 110 patients. Thirty-nine (35.5%) died before hospital discharge. LV dysfunction was present at admission in 38 patients (34.5%) and in 21 patients (36.2%) on day 8 ( P  = .59). Median baseline LVEF was 62% (interquartile range [IQR], 52%-69%), whereas median absolute value of baseline LV strain was 16% (IQR, 14%-19%). Survivors and nonsurvivors did not differ statistically significantly with respect to day 1 LV strain (17.9% vs 14.4%; P  = .12) or day 1 LVEF (60.5% vs 65%; P  = .06). Nonsurvivors showed worse day 1 right ventricle (RV) strain than survivors (16.3% vs 21.2%; P  = .04)., Interpretation: Among patients with critical COVID-19, LV and RV dysfunction is common, frequently identified only through deformation imaging, and early (day 1) RV dysfunction may be associated with clinical outcome., (© 2023 The Authors.)

Bronchoscopy for research purposes is a valuable tool to understand lung-specific biology in human participants. Despite published reports and active research protocols using this procedure in critically ill patients, no recent document encapsulates the important safety considerations and downstream applications of this procedure in this setting. The objectives were to identify safe practices for patient selection and protection of hospital staff, provide recommendations for sample procurement to standardize studies, and give guidance on sample preparation for novel research technologies. Seventeen international experts in the management of critically ill patients, bronchoscopy in clinical and research settings, and experience in patient-oriented clinical or translational research convened for a workshop. Review of relevant literature, expert presentations, and discussion generated the findings presented herein. The committee concludes that research bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage in critically ill patients on mechanical ventilation is valuable and safe in appropriately selected patients. This report includes recommendations on standardization of this procedure and prioritizes the reporting of sample management to produce more reproducible results between laboratories. This document serves as a resource to the community of researchers who endeavor to include bronchoscopy as part of their research protocols and highlights key considerations for the inclusion and safety of research participants.

As of April 2023, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in 1.1 million deaths in the United States, with approximately 75% of deaths occurring among adults aged ≥65 years (1). Data on the durability of protection provided by monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccination against critical outcomes of COVID-19 are limited beyond the Omicron BA.1 lineage period (December 26, 2021-March 26, 2022). In this case-control analysis, the effectiveness of 2-4 monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses was evaluated against COVID-19-associated invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and in-hospital death among immunocompetent adults aged ≥18 years during February 1, 2022-January 31, 2023. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against IMV and in-hospital death was 62% among adults aged ≥18 years and 69% among those aged ≥65 years. When stratified by time since last dose, VE was 76% at 7-179 days, 54% at 180-364 days, and 56% at ≥365 days. Monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccination provided substantial, durable protection against IMV and in-hospital death among adults during the Omicron variant period. All adults should remain up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccination to prevent critical COVID-19-associated outcomes., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Jonathan D. Casey reports grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), and a travel grant from Fisher and Paykel, outside the submitted work. Steven Y. Chang reports consulting fees from PureTech Health and Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, and participation as a Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) member for a study at UCLA, outside the submitted work. Abhijit Duggal reports grants from NIH/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), and consulting fees from Alung Technologies, outside the submitted work. David J. Douin reports a grant from NIH/National Institute of General Medical Sciences, outside the submitted work. Matthew C. Exline reports grants from NIH and Regeneron, honoria for speaking at the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition conference from Abbott Labs, and payment for testimony as a medical legal expert witness, outside the submitted work. D. Clark Files reports receiving a grant from NIH and participating on the Medpace DSMB, outside the submitted work. Manjusha Gaglani reports having served as co-chair of the Infectious Diseases and Immunization Committee for the Texas Pediatric Society, outside the submitted work. Kevin W. Gibbs reports grants from NIH and DoD, as well as support for travel to the 2022 Military Health System Research Symposium from DoD, outside the submitted work. Adit A. Ginde reports receiving grants from NIH, DoD, AbbVie, and Faron Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. Michelle N. Gong reports grants from NHLBI, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), speaking at medicine grand rounds at Yale and Westchester Medical College, travel support from the American Thoracic Society (ATS) and serving on the ATS board, DSMB membership fees from Regeneron and the Replenish Trial, and participating on the scientific advisory panel for Endpoint, outside the submitted work. Carlos G. Grijalva reports grants from NIH, AHRQ, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Campbell Alliance/Syneos Health; receipt of consulting fees from and participation on a DSMB for Merck, outside the submitted work. David N. Hager reports receiving grants from NIH, outside the submitted work. Natasha Halasa reports receiving grants from Sanofi and Quidel, outside the submitted work. Akram Khan reports receiving grants from United Therapeutics, Johnson & Johnson, 4D Medical, Eli Lily, Dompe Pharmaceuticals, and GlaxoSmithKline; and serves on the guidelines committee for Chest, outside the submitted work. Adam S. Lauring reports receiving grants from FluLab, NIH/National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and Burroughs Wellcome Fund, and consulting fees from Sanofi and Roche for consulting on oseltamivir and baloxavir respectively, outside the submitted work. Emily T. Martin reports grants from Merck and NIH, outside the submitted work. Tresa McNeal reports receiving a one-time payment for participating as a virtual webinar panelist for Clinical Updates in Heart Failure, and being a Practice Management Committee member for Society of Hospital Medicine, outside the submitted work. Arnold S. Monto reports a grant from NIH/NIAID, support for travel from the International Society for Influenza and other Respiratory Diseases, and participation on an advisory board for FDA, outside the submitted work. Ithan D. Peltan reports grants from NIH and Janssen Pharmaceuticals and institutional support from Asahi Kasei Pharma and Regeneron, outside the submitted work. Jay S. Steingrub reports a grant from NHLBI, outside the submitted work. Jennifer G. Wilson reports grants from NHLBI, outside the submitted work. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Importance: Preclinical models suggest dysregulation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection may increase the relative activity of angiotensin II compared with angiotensin (1-7) and may be an important contributor to COVID-19 pathophysiology., Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of RAS modulation using 2 investigational RAS agents, TXA-127 (synthetic angiotensin [1-7]) and TRV-027 (an angiotensin II type 1 receptor-biased ligand), that are hypothesized to potentiate the action of angiotensin (1-7) and mitigate the action of the angiotensin II., Design, Setting, and Participants: Two randomized clinical trials including adults hospitalized with acute COVID-19 and new-onset hypoxemia were conducted at 35 sites in the US between July 22, 2021, and April 20, 2022; last follow-up visit: July 26, 2022., Interventions: A 0.5-mg/kg intravenous infusion of TXA-127 once daily for 5 days or placebo. A 12-mg/h continuous intravenous infusion of TRV-027 for 5 days or placebo., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was oxygen-free days, an ordinal outcome that classifies a patient's status at day 28 based on mortality and duration of supplemental oxygen use; an adjusted odds ratio (OR) greater than 1.0 indicated superiority of the RAS agent vs placebo. A key secondary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality. Safety outcomes included allergic reaction, new kidney replacement therapy, and hypotension., Results: Both trials met prespecified early stopping criteria for a low probability of efficacy. Of 343 patients in the TXA-127 trial (226 [65.9%] aged 31-64 years, 200 [58.3%] men, 225 [65.6%] White, and 274 [79.9%] not Hispanic), 170 received TXA-127 and 173 received placebo. Of 290 patients in the TRV-027 trial (199 [68.6%] aged 31-64 years, 168 [57.9%] men, 195 [67.2%] White, and 225 [77.6%] not Hispanic), 145 received TRV-027 and 145 received placebo. Compared with placebo, both TXA-127 (unadjusted mean difference, -2.3 [95% CrI, -4.8 to 0.2]; adjusted OR, 0.88 [95% CrI, 0.59 to 1.30]) and TRV-027 (unadjusted mean difference, -2.4 [95% CrI, -5.1 to 0.3]; adjusted OR, 0.74 [95% CrI, 0.48 to 1.13]) resulted in no difference in oxygen-free days. In the TXA-127 trial, 28-day all-cause mortality occurred in 22 of 163 patients (13.5%) in the TXA-127 group vs 22 of 166 patients (13.3%) in the placebo group (adjusted OR, 0.83 [95% CrI, 0.41 to 1.66]). In the TRV-027 trial, 28-day all-cause mortality occurred in 29 of 141 patients (20.6%) in the TRV-027 group vs 18 of 140 patients (12.9%) in the placebo group (adjusted OR, 1.52 [95% CrI, 0.75 to 3.08]). The frequency of the safety outcomes was similar with either TXA-127 or TRV-027 vs placebo., Conclusions and Relevance: In adults with severe COVID-19, RAS modulation (TXA-127 or TRV-027) did not improve oxygen-free days vs placebo. These results do not support the hypotheses that pharmacological interventions that selectively block the angiotensin II type 1 receptor or increase angiotensin (1-7) improve outcomes for patients with severe COVID-19., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04924660.

Emerging evidence suggests the potential importance of inspiratory driving pressure (DP) and respiratory system elastance (E RS ) on outcomes among patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome. Their association with outcomes among heterogeneous populations outside of a controlled clinical trial is underexplored. We used electronic health record (EHR) data to characterize the associations of DP and E RS with clinical outcomes in a real-world heterogenous population., Design: Observational cohort study., Setting: Fourteen ICUs in two quaternary academic medical centers., Patients: Adult patients who received mechanical ventilation for more than 48 hours and less than 30 days., Interventions: None., Measurements and Main Results: EHR data from 4,233 ventilated patients from 2016 to 2018 were extracted, harmonized, and merged. A minority of the analytic cohort (37%) experienced a Pao 2 /Fio 2 of less than 300. A time-weighted mean exposure was calculated for ventilatory variables including tidal volume (V T ), plateau pressures (P PLAT ), DP, and E RS . Lung-protective ventilation adherence was high (94% with V T < 8.5 mL/kg, time-weighted mean V T = 6. 8 mL/kg, 88% with P PLAT ≤ 30 cm H 2 O). Although time-weighted mean DP (12.2 cm H 2 O) and E RS (1.9 cm H 2 O/[mL/kg]) were modest, 29% and 39% of the cohort experienced a DP greater than 15 cm H 2 O or an E RS greater than 2 cm H 2 O/(mL/kg), respectively. Regression modeling with adjustment for relevant covariates determined that exposure to time-weighted mean DP (> 15 cm H 2 O) was associated with increased adjusted risk of mortality and reduced adjusted ventilator-free days independent of adherence to lung-protective ventilation. Similarly, exposure to time-weighted mean E RS greater than 2 cm H 2 O/(mL/kg) was associated with increased adjusted risk of mortality., Conclusions: Elevated DP and E RS are associated with increased risk of mortality among ventilated patients independent of severity of illness or oxygenation impairment. EHR data can enable assessment of time-weighted ventilator variables and their association with clinical outcomes in a multicenter real-world setting., Competing Interests: The authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Society of Critical Care Medicine.)

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines were authorized in the United States in December 2020. Although vaccine effectiveness (VE) against mild infection declines markedly after several months, limited understanding exists on the long-term durability of protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization., Methods: Case-control analysis of adults (≥18 years) hospitalized at 21 hospitals in 18 states 11 March-15 December 2021, including COVID-19 case patients and reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction-negative controls. We included adults who were unvaccinated or vaccinated with 2 doses of a mRNA vaccine before the date of illness onset. VE over time was assessed using logistic regression comparing odds of vaccination in cases versus controls, adjusting for confounders. Models included dichotomous time (<180 vs ≥180 days since dose 2) and continuous time modeled using restricted cubic splines., Results: A total of 10 078 patients were included, 4906 cases (23% vaccinated) and 5172 controls (62% vaccinated). Median age was 60 years (interquartile range, 46-70), 56% were non-Hispanic White, and 81% had ≥1 medical condition. Among immunocompetent adults, VE <180 days was 90% (95% confidence interval [CI], 88-91) versus 82% (95% CI, 79-85) at ≥180 days (P < .001). VE declined for Pfizer-BioNTech (88% to 79%, P < .001) and Moderna (93% to 87%, P < .001) products, for younger adults (18-64 years) (91% to 87%, P = .005), and for adults ≥65 years of age (87% to 78%, P < .001). In models using restricted cubic splines, similar changes were observed., Conclusions: In a period largely predating Omicron variant circulation, effectiveness of 2 mRNA doses against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was largely sustained through 9 months., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. W. H. S. reports grant funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for this work, grants and consultant fees from Merck (for research on the surveillance of pneumococcal infections) and Gilead Sciences (for research on the surveillance of hepatitis C virus infections) outside this work. M. G. reports grant support from CDC (Ambulatory US Flu/COVID VE Network and Adult Inpatient Flu/COVID VE Network, HAIVEN), CDC-Abt Associates (Flu Vax Immunogenitiy RCT and RECVOERPROTECT COVID/Flu VE studies), CDC-Westat (VISION COVID Study), and Janssen (Johnson & Johnson) (RSV Severity App Birth Cohort Study). A. A. G. reports grant support from CDC, National Institute of Health (NIH), Department of Defense (DoD), AbbVie, and Faron Pharmaceuticals. J. D. C. reports grants from the CDC, NIH (K23HL153584), and Department of Defense. N. M. reports grants from the CDC (funded two other multicenter COVID-related projects separate from this work through payments to my institution). T. M. reports a grant from CDC and fees from the Society of Hospital Medicine for a talk about managing patients with congestive heart failure. K. G. reports grants from the CDC and the received grant funding for participation in executive committee of COVID-19 therapeutics from the NIH (ACTIV-4HT NECTAR Trial). D. C. F. reports grant support from CDC, consultant fees from Cytovale, and membership on a Medpace Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB). D. N. H. reports contracts from CDC, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI; funding for participation in the ACTIV4d - Host Tissue Trial), and Incyte Corporation (funding to enroll in RUCOVID-DEVENT) and membership on the SAFE EVICT Trial of VIT C in COVID-19 as DSMB chair. M. C. E. reports talks on nutrition in COVID pneumonia at the American Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN) conference sponsored by Abbott Labs. M. N. G. reports grant support from CDC, NHLBI, NIH, and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), travel support for American Thoracic Society board meeting, and membership on the Regeneron DSMB for monoclonal antibodies in COVID-19. N. J. reports grants from CDC, NIH/NHLBI/NINDS, and University of Washington Royalty Research Fund, and payment for expert testimony from the Washington Department of Health. I. D. P. reports grants from CDC, NIH, Intermountain Research & Medical Foundation, and Janssen Pharmaceuticals, and institutional fees from Asahi Kasei Pharma and from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. S. M. B. reports grants from CDC, NIH (for trials and other research activities related to COVID), and DoD (to study COVID); fees from Hamilton ventilators for chairing a DSMB; and personal fees from New York University for service on a DSMB. E. T. M. reports a grant from Merck outside the submitted work. A. M. reports grant support from CDC, NIH, NIAID, and membership on a DSMB for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). A. K. reports grants from CDC, Gilead Sciences, Ely Lily, United Therapeutics, BOA-Medical, and 4D Medical and membership on the Guidelines Committee for Chest. C. L. H. reports grants from CDC, NIH, and the American Lung Association. A. D. reports a grant from the CDC and consulting fees from ALung Technologies (Steering Committee). J. W. reports grants from the CDC and NIH (ARREST Pneumonia Trial UH3HL141722, ACTIV3a and 3b trials, and ACTIV4a trial), and membership on the American Board of Internal Medicine Critical Care Medicine exam committee. S. Y. C. reports grants from CDC and Regeneron (for 6R88-COV-2040 trial) and consulting fees from PureTech Health (for COVID study) and Kiniska (for possible ARDS study). J. H. K. reports grant support from CDC and NIH (1K23 AI137321-01A1). A. S. L. reports grants from the CDC, NIH, and Burroughs Wellcome Fund, consultant fees for antiviral drugs from Sanofi and fees from Roche for membership on a baloxavir trial steering committee. N. H. reports grants from CDC, NIH, Sanofi, and Quidel and honoraria for speaking at a continuing medical education event at American Academy of Pediatrics. C. G. G. reports consultant fees from Pfizer, Merck, and Sanofi and grants from Syneos Health, CDC, NIH, FDA, AHRQ, and Sanofi. T. R. reports grants from CDC and Abbvie Inc, consultant fees from Cytovale, Inc. and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., membership on a Sanofi, Inc. DSMB, a voluntary role as the Immediate Past President of ASPEN and stock in Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, Inc. I. J. reports grants/contracts from the CDC, NIH, Quidel, and Sanofi. C. J. L. reports grants/contracts from CDC, NIH, DoD, bioMerieux, Endpoint Health, Entegrion, Inc., and AbbVie; a patent issued to Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center for risk stratification in sepsis and septic shock, membership on a Study Principal Investigators DSMB for clinical trials unrelated to the current work, Executive Committee; Immediate Past President, Member, Board of Directors, Association for Clinical and Translational Science, and stock options in Bioscape Digita unrelated to the current work. W. B. S. reports a grant from the CDC and NIH (5K12HL133117-05). All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2022.)

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies are increasingly reporting relative VE (rVE) comparing a primary series plus booster doses with a primary series only. Interpretation of rVE differs from traditional studies measuring absolute VE (aVE) of a vaccine regimen against an unvaccinated referent group. We estimated aVE and rVE against COVID-19 hospitalization in primary-series plus first-booster recipients of COVID-19 vaccines., Methods: Booster-eligible immunocompetent adults hospitalized at 21 medical centers in the United States during December 25, 2021-April 4, 2022 were included. In a test-negative design, logistic regression with case status as the outcome and completion of primary vaccine series or primary series plus 1 booster dose as the predictors, adjusted for potential confounders, were used to estimate aVE and rVE., Results: A total of 2060 patients were analyzed, including 1104 COVID-19 cases and 956 controls. Relative VE against COVID-19 hospitalization in boosted mRNA vaccine recipients versus primary series only was 66% (95% confidence interval [CI], 55%-74%); aVE was 81% (95% CI, 75%-86%) for boosted versus 46% (95% CI, 30%-58%) for primary. For boosted Janssen vaccine recipients versus primary series, rVE was 49% (95% CI, -9% to 76%); aVE was 62% (95% CI, 33%-79%) for boosted versus 36% (95% CI, -4% to 60%) for primary., Conclusions: Vaccine booster doses increased protection against COVID-19 hospitalization compared with a primary series. Comparing rVE measures across studies can lead to flawed interpretations of the added value of a new vaccination regimen, whereas difference in aVE, when available, may be a more useful metric., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

Monovalent COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, designed against the ancestral strain of SARS-CoV-2, successfully reduced COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality in the United States and globally (1,2). However, vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19-associated hospitalization has declined over time, likely related to a combination of factors, including waning immunity and, with the emergence of the Omicron variant and its sublineages, immune evasion (3). To address these factors, on September 1, 2022, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended a bivalent COVID-19 mRNA booster (bivalent booster) dose, developed against the spike protein from ancestral SARS-CoV-2 and Omicron BA.4/BA.5 sublineages, for persons who had completed at least a primary COVID-19 vaccination series (with or without monovalent booster doses) ≥2 months earlier (4). Data on the effectiveness of a bivalent booster dose against COVID-19 hospitalization in the United States are lacking, including among older adults, who are at highest risk for severe COVID-19-associated illness. During September 8-November 30, 2022, the Investigating Respiratory Viruses in the Acutely Ill (IVY) Network § assessed effectiveness of a bivalent booster dose received after ≥2 doses of monovalent mRNA vaccine against COVID-19-associated hospitalization among immunocompetent adults aged ≥65 years. When compared with unvaccinated persons, VE of a bivalent booster dose received ≥7 days before illness onset (median = 29 days) against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was 84%. Compared with persons who received ≥2 monovalent-only mRNA vaccine doses, relative VE of a bivalent booster dose was 73%. These early findings show that a bivalent booster dose provided strong protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization in older adults and additional protection among persons with previous monovalent-only mRNA vaccination. All eligible persons, especially adults aged ≥65 years, should receive a bivalent booster dose to maximize protection against COVID-19 hospitalization this winter season. Additional strategies to prevent respiratory illness, such as masking in indoor public spaces, should also be considered, especially in areas where COVID-19 community levels are high (4,5)., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Samuel M. Brown reports serving as the data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) chair for Hamilton Ventilators outside the submitted work. Jonathan D. Casey reports grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Department of Defense (DoD), outside the submitted work. Steven Y. Chang consulted for PureTech Health in 2020 and Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals and is a DSMB member for an investigator-initiated study at UCLA. James D. Chappell reports grants from NIH and DoD during the conduct of the study. Cristie Columbus reports support from Baylor University Medical Center for meeting attendance, an advisory role to the Dallas County Public Health Committee, and other interests as the Chief of the Division of Infectious Diseases at Baylor University Medical Center and the Medical Director for Infection Prevention and Control/Healthcare epidemiology, outside the submitted work. David J. Douin reports grants received from NIH and the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, outside the submitted work. Abhijit Duggal reports grants from NIH and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), and participation on a Steering Committee for ALung technologies, outside the submitted work. Matthew C. Exline reports grants from NIH and Regeneron, as well as support from Abbott Labs and Medical Legal Expert Witness for sponsored talks, outside the submitted work. D. Clark Files reports personal consultant fees from Global Blood Therapeutics and is a DSMB member from Medpace, outside the submitted work. Manjusha Gaglani reports grants from CDC-Abt Associates, CDC-Westat, and Janssen, and participates as co-chair on the Infection Diseases and Immunizations Committee for the Texas Pediatric Society, outside the submitted work. Kevin W. Gibbs reports grants from NIH and DoD, and DoD funds for the Military Health System Research Symposium travel in 2022, outside the submitted work. Adit A. Ginde reports grants from NIH, DoD, AbbVie, and Faron Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. Michelle N. Gong reports grants from NHLBI and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), speaking at medicine grand rounds at New York Medical College, travel support for the American Thoracic Society (ATS) executive meeting and serving as ATS Chair Critical Care Assembly, DSMB membership fees from Regeneron, and participating on the scientific advisory panel for Endpoint, outside the submitted work. Carlos G. Grijalva reports consultancy fees from Merck; grants from Campbell Alliance/Syneos Health, NIH, the Food and Drug Administration, and AHRQ outside the submitted work. David N. Hager reports grants from NHLBI outside the submitted work. Natasha Halasa reports grants and nonfinancial support from Sanofi, and grants from Quidel outside the submitted work. Nicholas J. Johnson reports grants from NIH, DoD, University of Washington, and Medic One Foundation, outside the submitted work. Akram Khan reports grants from United Therapeutics, Johnson & Johnson, Ely Lilly, 4D Medical, Dompe Pharmaceuticals and GlaxoSmithKline, and serves on the Guidelines committee for Chest, outside the submitted work. Jennie H. Kwon reports grants from NIH outside the submitted work. Adam S. Lauring reports personal fees from Sanofi and Roche and grants from the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Burroughs Wellcome Fund, Flu Lab, outside the submitted work. Emily T. Martin reports grants from Merck, Flu Lab, and NIH, outside the submitted work. Tresa McNeal reports grants from participating as a webinar invited panelist and a Practice Management Committee member for Society of Hospital Medicine, outside the submitted work. Ithan D. Peltan reports grants from NIH, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, and institutional support from Asahi Kasei Pharma and Regeneron, outside the submitted work. Todd W. Rice reports grants from NIH and DoD, personal fees from Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cytovale, Inc., and Sanofi, Inc., outside the submitted work. William B. Stubblefield reports grants from NIH outside the submitted work. Jennifer G. Wilson reports personal funds from the American College of Emergency Physicians and American Board of Internal Medicine outside the submitted work. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Existing recommendations for mechanical ventilation are based on studies that under-sampled or excluded obese and severely obese individuals., Objective: To determine if driving pressure (DP) and total respiratory system elastance (E rs ) differ among normal/overweight (body mass index [BMI] < 30 kg/m 2 ), obese, and severely obese ventilator-dependent respiratory failure (VDRF) patients and if there any associations with clinical outcomes., Design Setting and Participants: Retrospective observational cohort study during 2016-2018 at two tertiary care academic medical centers using electronic health record data from the first 2 full days of mechanical ventilation. The cohort was stratified by BMI classes to measure median DP, time-weighted mean tidal volume, plateau pressure, and E rs for each BMI class., Setting and Participants: Mechanically ventilated patients in medical and surgical ICUs., Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome and effect measures included relative risk of in-hospital mortality, ventilator-free days, ICU length of stay, and hospital length of stay with multivariable adjustment., Results: The cohort included 3,204 patients with 976 (30.4%) and 382 (11.9%) obese and severely obese patients, respectively. Severe obesity was associated with a DP greater than or equal to 15 cm H 2 O (relative risk [RR], 1.51 [95% CI, 1.26-1.82]) and E rs greater than or equal to 2 cm H 2 O/(mL/kg) (RR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.14-1.49]). Despite elevated DP and E rs , there were no differences in in-hospital mortality, ventilator-free days, or ICU length of stay among all three groups., Conclusions and Relevance: Despite higher DP and E RS among obese and severely obese VDRF patients, there were no differences in in-hospital mortality or duration of mechanical ventilation, suggesting that DP has less prognostic value in obese and severely obese VDRF patients., Competing Interests: The authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Society of Critical Care Medicine.)

The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (B.1.1.529 or BA.1) became predominant in the United States by late December 2021 (1). BA.1 has since been replaced by emerging lineages BA.2 (including BA.2.12.1) in March 2022, followed by BA.4 and BA.5, which have accounted for a majority of SARS-CoV-2 infections since late June 2022 (1). Data on the effectiveness of monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines against BA.4/BA.5-associated hospitalizations are limited, and their interpretation is complicated by waning of vaccine-induced immunity (2-5). Further, infections with earlier Omicron lineages, including BA.1 and BA.2, reduce vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates because certain persons in the referent unvaccinated group have protection from infection-induced immunity. The IVY Network † assessed effectiveness of 2, 3, and 4 doses of monovalent mRNA vaccines compared with no vaccination against COVID-19-associated hospitalization among immunocompetent adults aged ≥18 years during December 26, 2021-August 31, 2022. During the BA.1/BA.2 period, VE 14-150 days after a second dose was 63% and decreased to 34% after 150 days. Similarly, VE 7-120 days after a third dose was 79% and decreased to 41% after 120 days. VE 7-120 days after a fourth dose was 61%. During the BA.4/BA.5 period, similar trends were observed, although CIs for VE estimates between categories of time since the last dose overlapped. VE 14-150 days and >150 days after a second dose was 83% and 37%, respectively. VE 7-120 days and >120 days after a third dose was 60%and 29%, respectively. VE 7-120 days after the fourth dose was 61%. Protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization waned even after a third dose. The newly authorized bivalent COVID-19 vaccines include mRNA from the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strain and from shared mRNA components between BA.4 and BA.5 lineages and are expected to be more immunogenic against BA.4/BA.5 than monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines (6-8). All eligible adults aged ≥18 years § should receive a booster dose, which currently consists of a bivalent mRNA vaccine, to maximize protection against BA.4/BA.5 and prevent COVID-19-associated hospitalization., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Samuel M. Brown reports personal fees from Hamilton Ventilators outside the submitted work. Jonathan D. Casey reports grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), outside the submitted work. Steven Y. Chang reports consulting for PureTech Health in 2020 and Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals and membership on the safety monitoring board (DSMB) for an investigator-initiated study at UCLA. James D. Chappell reports grants from NIH and DoD during the conduct of the study. David J. Douin reports grants received from NIH and National Institute of General Medical Sciences, outside the submitted work. Abhijit Duggal reports grants from NIH and participation on a steering committee for ALung technologies, outside the submitted work. Matthew C. Exline reports grants from the NIH and Regeneron, as well as support from Abbott Labs for sponsored talks, outside the submitted work. D. Clark Files reports personal consultant fees from Cytovale and membership on DSMB from Medpace, outside the submitted work. Anne P. Frosch reports grants from NIH, outside the submitted work. Manjusha Gaglani reports grants from Abt Associates, Westat, Janssen, and participation as co-chair on the Infection Diseases and Immunizations Committee for the Texas Pediatric Society, outside the submitted work. Kevin W. Gibbs reports grants from NIH and DoD, and DoD funds for Military Health System Research Symposium travel in 2022, outside the submitted work. Adit A. Ginde reports grants from NIH, DoD, AbbVie, and Faron Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. Michelle N. Gong reports grants from NIH, speaking at medicine grand rounds at New York Medical College, travel support for the American Thoracic Society executive meeting, DSMB membership fees from Regeneron, and participation on the scientific advisory panel for Endpoint, outside the submitted work. Carlos G. Grijalva reports consultancy fees from Pfizer, Merck, and Sanofi-Pasteur; grants from Campbell Alliance/Syneos Health, NIH, the Food and Drug Administration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and Sanofi, outside the submitted work. David N. Hager grants from NIH, outside the submitted work. Natasha Halasa reports grants and nonfinancial support from Sanofi, and grants from Quidel outside the submitted work. Nicholas J. Johnson reports grants from the NIH, DoD, University of Washington, and Medic One Foundation, outside the submitted work. Akram Khan reports grants from United Therapeutics, Johnson & Johnson, Ely Lilly, 4D Medical, Dompe Pharmaceuticals, and GlaxoSmithKline, outside the submitted work. Jennie H. Kwon reports grants from National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), outside the submitted work. Adam S. Lauring reports personal fees from Sanofi and Roche and grants from NIAID, Burroughs Wellcome Fund, Flu Lab, outside the submitted work. Emily T. Martin reports grants from Merck, outside the submitted work. Tresa McNeal reports participation as a webinar invited panelist and a Practice Management Committee member for Society of Hospital Medicine, outside the submitted work. Ithan D. Peltan reports grants from NIH, Janssen Pharmaceuticals and institutional support from Asahi Kasei Pharma and Regeneron, outside the submitted work. Todd W. Rice reports grants from Abbvie Inc, and personal fees from Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Cytovale, Inc., and Sanofi, Inc., outside the submitted work. William B. Stubblefield reports grants from NIH, outside the submitted work. Jennifer G. Wilson reports grants from NIH, and personal funds from the American College of Emergency Physicians and American Board of Internal Medicine, outside the submitted work. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Background . Adults in the United States (US) began receiving the adenovirus vector coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine, Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson [Janssen]), in February 2021. We evaluated Ad26.COV2.S vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 hospitalization and high disease severity during the first 10 months of its use. Methods . In a multicenter case-control analysis of US adults (≥18 years) hospitalized 11 March to 15 December 2021, we estimated VE against susceptibility to COVID-19 hospitalization (VEs), comparing odds of prior vaccination with a single dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine between hospitalized cases with COVID-19 and controls without COVID-19. Among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, we estimated VE against disease progression (VEp) to death or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), comparing odds of prior vaccination between patients with and without progression. Results . After excluding patients receiving mRNA vaccines, among 3979 COVID-19 case-patients (5% vaccinated with Ad26.COV2.S) and 2229 controls (13% vaccinated with Ad26.COV2.S), VEs of Ad26.COV2.S against COVID-19 hospitalization was 70% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 63-75%) overall, including 55% (29-72%) among immunocompromised patients, and 72% (64-77%) among immunocompetent patients, for whom VEs was similar at 14-90 days (73% [59-82%]), 91-180 days (71% [60-80%]), and 181-274 days (70% [54-81%]) postvaccination. Among hospitalized COVID-19 case-patients, VEp was 46% (18-65%) among immunocompetent patients. Conclusions . The Ad26.COV2.S COVID-19 vaccine reduced the risk of COVID-19 hospitalization by 72% among immunocompetent adults without waning through 6 months postvaccination. After hospitalization for COVID-19, vaccinated immunocompetent patients were less likely to require IMV or die compared to unvaccinated immunocompetent patients., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. M. G.: CDC: Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) US Flu/COVID VE Network, HAIVEN, Synergy studies; CDC-Abt: BSWH FluVax Trial and RECOVER-PROTECT Cohort Studies; CDC-Westat: BSWH VISION COVID-Flu VE Study; Janssen: BSWH Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) Severity App Birth Cohort Study; Co-Chair of Infectious Diseases and Immunization Committee—Texas Pediatric Society—Texas Chapter of American Academy of Pediatrics. A. G.: National Institutes of Health (NIH), Department of Defense; Faron Pharmaceuticals; AbbVie; D Douin: NIH/National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) Institutional Training Grant. J. C.: NIH and Department of Defense grants unrelated to this work. T. A. M.: Panelist for Society of Hospital Medicine Updates in Heart Failure; Board member for Scott & White Clinic Physicians Board of Directors. K. G.: NECTAR Executive Committee member ACTIV4-HT; D. C. F.: Cytovale consulting fees; Medpace Data Safety Monitoring Board. D. N. H.: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NIHLBI) participant in the ACTIV4d-Host Tissue Trial; Chair DSMD—SAFE EVICT Trial of VIT C in COVID-19. M. N. G.: Grants from NHLBI and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ); Consulting fees for Endpoint for scientific advisory panel; Honoraria—Medicine Grand Rounds from Westchester Medical Center; Support for attending ATS Board of Directors meeting; Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) for Regeneron study and REPLENISH trial. N. J. J.: IH grants paid to University of Washington Royalty Research Fund; Department of Defense grants; Medic One Foundation grants; WA Department of Health expert testimony payment; DSMB for Opticyte, Inc.; Chair, ACEP Critical Care Section. I. P.: NIH grants; Regeneron Pharmaceuticals grant; Intermountain Research & Medical Foundation grant; Asahi Kasei Pharma grant; Janssen Pharmaceuticals grant. S. B.: NIH grants and Department of Defense grants; DSMB for Hamilton ventilators and NYU. E. T. M.: Merck grant. A. S. M.: NIH grant. A. K.: NIH grants; United Therapeutics grants; Eli Lily grants; Johnson & Johnson—BOA Medical—4DMedical research grants; rA. D.: Center PI for PETAL network through NHLBI grant; on steering committee for A Lung technologies. J. G. W.: NIH/NHLBI funding for ACTIV-3 and ACTIV-4 trials; American Board of Internal Medicine—member of Critical Care Exam Committee. S. Y. C.: Consulting fees for PureTech Health and Kiniska Pharmaceuticals; Honoraria for La Jolla. H. M. B.: CDC grant for HCP COVID vaccine effectiveness. J. H. K.: NIAID grant. M. C. E.: Abbott Labs honoraria for speaking on ASPEN on nutrition in critical illness from COVID. A. L.: grants from CDC, NIH, and Burroughs Wellcome Fund; consulting fees from Sanofi on antiviral drugs and for Roche on baloxavir trial steering committee. N. H.: grants from NIH, Quidel, and Sanofi; Honoraria for speaking at CME event at AAP. C. G. G.: grants from Campbell Alliance/Syneos Health, Sanofi, CDC, AHRQ, NIH, and FDA; consulting fees from Merck, Pfizer, and Sanofi-Pasteur. T. W. R.: grants from NIH, Department of Defense and AbbVie; consulting fees for Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Cytovale, Inc.; DSMB for Sanofi, Inc.; Immediate Past President—ASPEN; Stock in Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, Inc. for consulting work. W. B. S.: NIH training grants. C. J. L.: grants from NIH, Department of Defense; CDC; bioMerieux; Entegrion, Inc.; Endpoint Health; AbbVie; Patents for risk stratification in sepsis and septic shock issued to Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center; DSMBs for clinical trials for Study Principal Investigators; Association for Clinical and Translational Science (Executive Committee, Immediate Past President, and Board of Directors); stock options in Bioscape Digita. All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2022.)

Macrophages are important mediators of skeletal muscle function in both healthy and diseased states. In vivo specific depletion of macrophages provides an experimental method to understand physiological and pathophysiological effects of macrophages. Systemic depletion of macrophages can deplete skeletal muscle macrophages but also alters systemic inflammatory responses and metabolism, which confounds the muscle specific effects of macrophage depletion. The primary aim of this manuscript is to evaluate two methods of murine intramuscular macrophage depletion in an acute lung injury-associated indirect skeletal muscle wasting mouse model. Adult C57BL/6 (WT) and Macrophage Fas-Induced Apoptosis (MaFIA, C57BL/6-Tg) mice received clodronate liposomes or the dimerization drug AP20187 through intramuscular injection of the tibialis anterior muscle compartment, respectively. Vehicle control was injected in the contralateral muscle. We demonstrate intramuscular AP20187 in the MaFIA mouse depletes macrophages but causes an infiltration of CD45 intermediate neutrophils. In contrast, intramuscular clodronate liposomes successfully depletes macrophages without an associated increase in CD45 intermediate cells. In conclusion, intramuscular clodronate is effective for selective depletion of muscle macrophages without eliciting acute inflammation seen with AP20187 in MaFIA mice. This technique is an important tool to study the functional roles of macrophages in skeletal muscle., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest in this work., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Studies of early depth of sedation in mixed critically ill populations have suggested benefit to light sedation; however, the relationship of early depth of sedation with outcomes in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is unknown., Materials and Methods: We performed a propensity-score matched analysis of early light sedation (Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale Score, RASS 0 to -1 or equivalent) versus deep sedation (RASS -2 or lower) in patients enrolled in the non-intervention group of The Reevaluation of Systemic Early Neuromuscular Blockade trial. Primary outcome was 90 day mortality. Secondary outcomes included days free of mechanical ventilation, days not in ICU, days not in hospital at day 28., Results: 137 of 486 participants (28.2%) received early light sedation. Vasopressor usage and Apache III scores significantly differed between groups. Prior to matching, 90-day mortality was higher in the early deep sedation (45.3%) compared to light sedation (34.2%) group. In the propensity score matched cohort, there was no difference in 90-day mortality (Odds Ratio (OR) 0.72, 95% CI 0.41, 1.27, p = 0.26) or secondary outcomes between the groups., Conclusions: We did not find an association between early depth of sedation and clinical outcomes in this cohort of patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Mortality historically has been the primary outcome of choice for acute and critical care clinical trials. However, undue reliance on mortality can limit the scope of trials that can be performed. Large sample sizes are usually needed for trials powered for a mortality outcome, and focusing solely on mortality fails to recognize the importance that reducing morbidity can have on patients' lives. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for rapid, efficient trials to rigorously evaluate new therapies for hospitalized patients with acute lung injury. Oxygen-free days (OFDs) is a novel outcome for clinical trials that is a composite of mortality and duration of new supplemental oxygen use. It is designed to characterize recovery from acute lung injury in populations with a high prevalence of new hypoxemia and supplemental oxygen use. In these populations, OFDs captures two patient-centered consequences of acute lung injury: mortality and hypoxemic lung dysfunction. Power to detect differences in OFDs typically is greater than that for other clinical trial outcomes, such as mortality and ventilator-free days. OFDs is the primary outcome for the Fourth Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV-4) Host Tissue platform, which evaluates novel therapies targeting the host response to COVID-19 among adults hospitalized with COVID-19 and new hypoxemia. This article outlines the rationale for use of OFDs as an outcome for clinical trials, proposes a standardized method for defining and analyzing OFDs, and provides a framework for sample size calculations using the OFD outcome., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Chest Physicians. All rights reserved.)

Background: Levels of plasma SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) antigen may be an important biomarker in patients with COVID-19 and enhance our understanding of the pathogenesis of COVID-19., Objective: To evaluate whether levels of plasma antigen can predict short-term clinical outcomes and identify clinical and viral factors associated with plasma antigen levels in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2., Design: Cross-sectional study of baseline plasma antigen level from 2540 participants enrolled in the TICO (Therapeutics for Inpatients With COVID-19) platform trial from August 2020 to November 2021, with additional data on day 5 outcome and time to discharge., Setting: 114 centers in 10 countries., Participants: Adults hospitalized for acute SARS-CoV-2 infection with 12 days or less of symptoms., Measurements: Baseline plasma viral N antigen level was measured at a central laboratory. Delta variant status was determined from baseline nasal swabs using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. Associations between baseline patient characteristics and viral factors and baseline plasma antigen levels were assessed using both unadjusted and multivariable modeling. Association between elevated baseline antigen level of 1000 ng/L or greater and outcomes, including worsening of ordinal pulmonary scale at day 5 and time to hospital discharge, were evaluated using logistic regression and Fine-Gray regression models, respectively., Results: Plasma antigen was below the level of quantification in 5% of participants at enrollment, and 1000 ng/L or greater in 57%. Baseline pulmonary severity of illness was strongly associated with plasma antigen level, with mean plasma antigen level 3.10-fold higher among those requiring noninvasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula compared with room air (95% CI, 2.22 to 4.34). Plasma antigen level was higher in those who lacked antispike antibodies (6.42 fold; CI, 5.37 to 7.66) and in those with the Delta variant (1.73 fold; CI, 1.41 to 2.13). Additional factors associated with higher baseline antigen level included male sex, shorter time since hospital admission, decreased days of remdesivir, and renal impairment. In contrast, race, ethnicity, body mass index, and immunocompromising conditions were not associated with plasma antigen levels. Plasma antigen level of 1000 ng/L or greater was associated with a markedly higher odds of worsened pulmonary status at day 5 (odds ratio, 5.06 [CI, 3.41 to 7.50]) and longer time to hospital discharge (median, 7 vs. 4 days; subhazard ratio, 0.51 [CI, 0.45 to 0.57]), with subhazard ratios similar across all levels of baseline pulmonary severity., Limitations: Plasma samples were drawn at enrollment, not hospital presentation. No point-of-care test to measure plasma antigen is currently available., Conclusion: Elevated plasma antigen is highly associated with both severity of pulmonary illness and clinically important patient outcomes. Multiple clinical and viral factors are associated with plasma antigen level at presentation. These data support a potential role of ongoing viral replication in the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 in hospitalized patients., Primary Funding Source: U.S. government Operation Warp Speed and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Background: The study objective was to evaluate 2- and 3-dose coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) in preventing COVID-19 hospitalization among adult solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients., Methods: We conducted a 21-site case-control analysis of 10 425 adults hospitalized in March to December 2021. Cases were hospitalized with COVID-19; controls were hospitalized for an alternative diagnosis (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-negative). Participants were classified as follows: SOT recipient (n = 440), other immunocompromising condition (n = 1684), or immunocompetent (n = 8301). The 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% confidence interval [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., Conclusions: Effectiveness of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines was lower for SOT recipients than immunocompetent adults 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., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. J. H. K. reports grant support from National Institutes of Health (NIH)/National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (1K23 AI137321-01A1). M. G. reports grant support from CDC, CDC-Abt, CDC-Westat, and Janssen and a role as the Co-Chair of the Infectious Diseases and Immunization Committee, Texas Pediatric Society, Texas Chapter of American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). H. K. T. reports a grant from CDC. A. A. G. reports grant support from CDC, NIH, US Department of Defense (DOD), AbbVie, and Faron Pharmaceuticals. T. M. reports payments as a panelist for the Society of Hospital Medicine Updates in Heart Failure (August 25, 2021) and as a board member of the Scott & White Clinic Physicians Board of Directors. D. J. D. reports grant support from NIH/National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM135169). J. D. C. reports grants from the NIH and DOD. K. W. G. reports grant support as a NECTAR Executive Committee member ACTIV-4HT. D. C. F. reports consultant fees from Cytovale and membership on a Medpace Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB). D. N. H. reports a contract from CDC and grant support from National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) for participation in the ACTIV4d-Host Tissue Trial. M. C. E. reports talks on nutrition in COVID pneumonia at ASPEN conference sponsored by Abbott Laboratories. M. N. G. reports grant support from the CDC, funding from NHLBI and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), and fees from Endpoint for participating on a scientific advisory panel, payment for Medicine Grand Rounds at Westchester Medical Center, travel support for attending the ATS Board of Directors meeting, and participation on a DSMB for Regeneron and REPLINISH trial. N. J. J. reports grants from the NIH, DOD, and Medic One Foundation, payment for expert testimony from the Washington Department of Health, participation on DSMBs for Opticyte Inc., Multi-Center, Randomized Control Trial to Study the Effectiveness of Hyperbaric Oxygen for COVID-19 patients with Moderate to Severe Hypoxemia (NCT04619719), and Remote Ischemic Conditioning to Enhance Resuscitation (RICE) Pilot (NCT04265807), and participation as Chair of the ACEP Critical Care Section. I. D. P. reports grants from the CDC, NIH, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, and Intermountain Research & Medical Foundation, institutional fees from Asahi Kasei Pharma and from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. S. M. B. reports grants from the CDC, NIH, and DOD, fees from Hamilton ventilators for chairing a DSMB, and personal fees from New York University for service on a DSMB. E. T. M. reports a grant from Merck outside the submitted work. A. K. reports grants from the NIH, Ely Lily, United Therapeutics, Johnson & Johnson, BOA Medical, and 4D Medical. A. D. reports funding as the Center PI for PETAL network through NHLBI grant and for participation on a steering committee for ALung technologies. J. G. W. reports grant support from NIH/NHLBI for ACTIV-3 and ACTIV-4 trials and membership on the American Board of Internal Medicine Critical Care Exam Committee. S. Y. C. reports payment as a speaker for La Jolla Pharmaceuticals and consultant fees for PureTech Health and Kiniska Pharmaceuticals. H. M. B. reports grants from the CDC. A. S. L. reports grants from the CDC, NIH, and Burroughs Wellcome Fund, consultant fees from Sanofi, and fees from Roche for membership on a trial steering committee. N. H. reports grants from the CDC, NIH, Sanofi, and Quidel and honoraria for speaking at Continuing Medical Education event at AAP. J. D. C. reports grant support from the CDC. C. G. G. reports consultant fees from Pfizer, Merck, and Sanofi-Pasteur and grants from Campbell Alliance/Syneos Health, CDC, NIH, US Food and Drug Administration, AHRQ, and Sanofi. T. W. R. reports grants from the NIH, DOD, and AbbVie, personal fees from Cumberland Pharmaceuticals as the Director of Medical Affairs, consultant fees from Cytovale, Inc., personal fees from Sanofi, Inc. for serving as a DSMB board member, a role as the Immediate Past President of the American Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN), and stock from Cumberland Pharmaceuticals for consulting work. C J. L. reports grants/contracts from the CDC, NIH, DOD, bioMerieux, Endpoint LLC, Entegrion, Inc., and AbbVie, a patent issued to Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center for risk stratification in sepsis and septic shock, participation on DSMBS for Study Principal Investigators, roles on the Executive Committee, Immediate Past President, Member, Board of Directors for the Association of Clinical and Translational Science, and stock options in Bioscape Digita. W. H. S. reports grant funding from the CDC for this work. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The protection provided by natural versus hybrid immunity from COVID-19 is unclear. We reflect on the challenges from trying to conduct a randomized post-SARS-CoV-2 infection vaccination trial study with rapidly evolving scientific data, vaccination guidelines, varying international policies, difficulties with vaccine availability, vaccine hesitancy, and a constantly evolving virus., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests D.L.B is on the advisory boards of Gilead, MerckSharpe & Dohme, Pfizer, and ViiV, and receives travel grants from ViiV Healthcare. G.M. receives research grants from Gilead, AbbvieInc., ViiV Healthcare, and Janssen, and is on the advisory boards of Gileadand AstraZeneca. The other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The evolution of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has resulted in the emergence of new variant lineages that have exacerbated the COVID-19 pandemic. Some of those variants were designated as variants of concern/interest (VOC/VOI) by national or international authorities based on many factors including their potential impact on vaccine-mediated protection from disease. To ascertain and rank the risk of VOCs and VOIs, we analyze the ability of 14 variants (614G, Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, Epsilon, Zeta, Eta, Theta, Iota, Kappa, Lambda, Mu, and Omicron) to escape from mRNA vaccine-induced antibodies. The variants show differential reductions in neutralization and replication by post-vaccination sera. Although the Omicron variant (BA.1, BA.1.1, and BA.2) shows the most escape from neutralization, sera collected after a third dose of vaccine (booster sera) retain moderate neutralizing activity against that variant. Therefore, vaccination remains an effective strategy during the COVID-19 pandemic., (© 2022. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Background: We sought to assess whether persistent COVID-19 symptoms beyond 6 months (Long-COVID) among patients with mild COVID-19 is associated with poorer health status, quality of life, and psychological distress., Methods: This was a multicenter prospective cohort study that included adult outpatients with acute COVID-19 from eight sites during 2-week sampling periods from April 1 and July 28, 2020. Participants were contacted 6-11 months after their first positive SARS-CoV-2 to complete a survey, which collected information on the severity of eight COVID-19 symptoms using a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (not present) to 3 (severe) at 1 month before COVID-19 (pre-illness) and at follow-up; the difference for each was calculated as an attributable persistent symptom severity score. A total attributable persistent COVID-19 symptom burden score was calculated by summing the attributable persistent severity scores for all eight symptoms. Outcomes measured at long-term follow-up comprised overall health status (EuroQol visual analogue scale), quality of life (EQ-5D-5L), and psychological distress (Patient Health Questionnaire-4). The association between the total attributable persistent COVID-19 burden score and each outcome was analyzed using multivariable proportional odds regression., Results: Of the 2092 outpatients with COVID-19, 436 (21%) responded to the survey. The median (IQR) attributable persistent COVID-19 symptom burden score was 2 (0, 4); higher scores were associated with lower overall health status (aOR 0.63; 95% CI: 0.57-0.69), lower quality of life (aOR: 0.65; 95%CI: 0.59-0.72), and higher psychological distress (aOR: 1.40; 95%CI, 1.28-1.54) after adjusting for age, race, ethnicity, education, and income., Conclusions: In participants with mild acute COVID-19, the burden of persistent symptoms was significantly associated with poorer long-term health status, poorer quality of life, and psychological distress., (© 2022 The Authors. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This article has been contributed to by U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.)

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has created a global pandemic infecting over 230 million people and costing millions of lives. Therapies to attenuate severe disease are desperately needed. Cenicriviroc (CVC), a C-C chemokine receptor type 5 (CCR5) and C-C chemokine receptor type 2 (CCR2) antagonist, an agent previously studied in advanced clinical trials for patients with HIV or nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), may have the potential to reduce respiratory and cardiovascular organ failures related to COVID-19. Inhibiting the CCR2 and CCR5 pathways could attenuate or prevent inflammation or fibrosis in both early and late stages of the disease and improve outcomes of COVID-19. Clinical trials using CVC either in addition to standard of care (SoC; e.g., dexamethasone) or in combination with other investigational agents in patients with COVID-19 are currently ongoing. These trials intend to leverage the anti-inflammatory actions of CVC for ameliorating the clinical course of COVID-19 and prevent complications. This article reviews the literature surrounding the CCR2 and CCR5 pathways, their proposed role in COVID-19, and the potential role of CVC to improve outcomes., Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: TF received an unrestricted research grant from Allergan/AbbVie to support the Charité trial of CVC in COVID-19, institutional research funding from Allergan, BMS, Inventiva, Gilead, and consulting fees and honoraria for lectures from Allergan, Bayer, Gilead, BMS, Boehringer, Intercept, Ionis, Inventiva, Merz, Pfizer, Alnylam, NGM, CSL Behring, Novo Nordisk, Novartis, AbbVie, Falk, and Merz. WGP is the principal investigator in the ACTIV-1 clinical trial, he receives funding from the NIH unrelated to this work and has received grants and personal fees for Merck. FDC is an investigator in the ISPY COVID Clinical Trial, receives funding from the NIH unrelated to this work, is a consultant for Cytovale and on the Data Safety Board for Medpace. FGW, AO, PD are employees of AbbVie and may hold stock or options.

The abundance, anatomical distribution, and vascularity of skeletal muscle make it a potentially important contributor to local cytokine production and systemic cytokine abundance during inflammatory events. An orchestrated balance between the production of pro- and anti-inflammatory mediators is necessary for proper immune function, yet the contribution of the body's largest organ system, comprised primarily of skeletal muscle myocytes that fuse to form myofibers, to this process is largely unknown. Endotoxin (lipopolysaccharide, LPS) stimulates toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) to induce the production of several pro-inflammatory cytokines, including interleukin-6 (IL-6) and C-C motif chemokine ligand 2 (CCL2), by a of myriad cell types. We sought to quantify the influence of myofibers on systemic cytokine concentrations following an acute endotoxemia challenge. To accomplish this, we generated muscle specific conditional knockouts for TLR4 (TLR4SMKO), IL-6 (IL6SMKO), and CCL2 (CCL2SMKO). We administered low concentrations of intravenous LPS (IV LPS) to these receptor and effector knockout mice and collected samples after 3 h. Using gene expression analysis of gastrocnemius muscle and serum cytokine measurements after IV LPS, we determined that deletion of myofiber IL-6 or CCL2 led to a 93% and 57% reduction of these specific cytokines in the systemic circulation, respectively. Myofiber specific TLR4 deletion decreased the expression of IL-6, CCL2, and C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 1 (CXCL1) in the gastrocnemius muscle. These data indicate the critical involvement and direct contribution of myofibers during the early systemic inflammatory cytokine response to endotoxin., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Bivona III, Mank, Stapleton, Files, Toth and Poynter.)

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic brought an urgent need to discover novel effective therapeutics for patients hospitalised with severe COVID-19. The Investigation of Serial studies to Predict Your Therapeutic Response with Imaging And moLecular Analysis (ISPY COVID-19 trial) was designed and implemented in early 2020 to evaluate investigational agents rapidly and simultaneously on a phase 2 adaptive platform. This manuscript outlines the design, rationale, implementation and challenges of the ISPY COVID-19 trial during the first phase of trial activity from April 2020 until December 2021., Methods and Analysis: The ISPY COVID-19 Trial is a multicentre open-label phase 2 platform trial in the USA designed to evaluate therapeutics that may have a large effect on improving outcomes from severe COVID-19. The ISPY COVID-19 Trial network includes academic and community hospitals with significant geographical diversity across the country. Enrolled patients are randomised to receive one of up to four investigational agents or a control and are evaluated for a family of two primary outcomes-time to recovery and mortality. The statistical design uses a Bayesian model with 'stopping' and 'graduation' criteria designed to efficiently discard ineffective therapies and graduate promising agents for definitive efficacy trials. Each investigational agent arm enrols to a maximum of 125 patients per arm and is compared with concurrent controls. As of December 2021, 11 investigational agent arms had been activated, and 8 arms were complete. Enrolment and adaptation of the trial design are ongoing., Ethics and Dissemination: ISPY COVID-19 operates under a central institutional review board via Wake Forest School of Medicine IRB00066805. Data generated from this trial will be reported in peer-reviewed medical journals., Trial Registration Number: NCT04488081., Competing Interests: Competing interests: DCF has received funding from Quantum Leap Healthcare Collaborative related to this work and from the National Institutes of Health unrelated to this work. DCF has worked as a consultant for Cytovale and Medpace unrelated to this work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: As severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination coverage increases in the United States, there is a need to understand the real-world effectiveness against severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and among people at increased risk for poor outcomes., Methods: In a multicenter case-control analysis of US adults hospitalized March 11-May 5, 2021, we evaluated vaccine effectiveness to prevent COVID-19 hospitalizations by comparing odds of prior vaccination with a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) between cases hospitalized with COVID-19 and hospital-based controls who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2., Results: Among 1212 participants, including 593 cases and 619 controls, median age was 58 years, 22.8% were Black, 13.9% were Hispanic, and 21.0% had immunosuppression. SARS-CoV-2 lineage B0.1.1.7 (Alpha) was the most common variant (67.9% of viruses with lineage determined). Full vaccination (receipt of 2 vaccine doses ≥14 days before illness onset) had been received by 8.2% of cases and 36.4% of controls. Overall vaccine effectiveness was 87.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 80.7-91.3). Vaccine effectiveness was similar for Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, and highest in adults aged 18-49 years (97.4%; 95% CI, 79.3-9.7). Among 45 patients with vaccine-breakthrough COVID hospitalizations, 44 (97.8%) were ≥50 years old and 20 (44.4%) had immunosuppression. Vaccine effectiveness was lower among patients with immunosuppression (62.9%; 95% CI,20.8-82.6) than without immunosuppression (91.3%; 95% CI, 85.6-94.8)., Conclusion: During March-May 2021, SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines were highly effective for preventing COVID-19 hospitalizations among US adults. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was beneficial for patients with immunosuppression, but effectiveness was lower in the immunosuppressed population., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)