RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Association between tocilizumab, sarilumab and all-cause mortality at 28 days in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: A network meta-analysis
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.08.26.21262523
DO 10.1101/2021.08.26.21262523
A1 Peter J Godolphin
A1 David J Fisher
A1 Lindsay R Berry
A1 Lennie PG Derde
A1 Janet V Diaz
A1 Anthony C Gordon
A1 Elizabeth Lorenzi
A1 John C Marshall
A1 Srinivas Murthy
A1 Manu Shankar-Hari
A1 Jonathan AC Sterne
A1 Jayne F Tierney
A1 Claire L Vale
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/08/28/2021.08.26.21262523.abstract
AB Objective To estimate pairwise associations between administration of tocilizumab, sarilumab and usual care or placebo with 28-day mortality, in COVID-19 patients receiving concomitant corticosteroids and non-invasive or mechanical ventilation, based on all available direct and indirect evidence.Methods Eligible trials randomized hospitalized patients with COVID-19 that compared either interleukin-6 receptor antagonist with usual care or placebo in a recent prospective meta-analysis (27 trials, 10930 patients) or that directly compared tocilizumab with sarilumab. Data were restricted to patients receiving corticosteroids and either non-invasive or invasive ventilation at randomization.Pairwise associations between tocilizumab, sarilumab and usual care or placebo for all-cause mortality 28 days after randomization were estimated using a frequentist contrast-based network meta-analysis of odds ratios (ORs), implementing multivariate fixed-effects models that assume consistency between the direct and indirect evidence.Results One trial (REMAP-CAP) was identified that directly compared tocilizumab with sarilumab and supplied results on all-cause mortality at 28-days. This network meta-analysis was based on 898 eligible patients (278 deaths) from REMAP-CAP and 3710 eligible patients from 18 trials (1278 deaths) from the prospective meta-analysis. Summary ORs were similar for tocilizumab [0.82 [0.71-0.95, P=0.008]] and sarilumab [0.80 [0.61-1.04, P=0.09]] compared with usual care or placebo. The summary OR for 28-day mortality comparing tocilizumab with sarilumab was 1.03 [95%CI 0.81-1.32, P=0.80]. The P value for the global test for inconsistency was 0.28.Conclusion Administration of either tocilizumab or sarilumab was associated with lower 28-day all-cause mortality compared with usual care or placebo. The association is not dependent on the choice of interleukin-6 receptor antagonist.Competing Interest StatementPJG and DJF are part supported by Prostate Cancer UK (https://prostatecanceruk.org/) Grant number: RIA 16-ST2-020. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. PJG is part supported by the National Institute for Health Research Development and Skills Enhancement Award (NIHR301653). The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the UK National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health. CLV, DJF and JFT are supported by the UK Medical Research Council (https://mrc.ukri.org/) Grant number: MC_UU_12023/24. LRB received grants from Berry Consultants. LPGD is a member of the COVID-19 guideline committee for the Society of Critical Care Medicine/European Society of Intensive Care Medicine/Surviving Sepsis Campaign. ACG was supported by grants from the UK National Institute for Health Research and the European Union and received personal fees from Thirty Respiratory Ltd and GlaxoSmithKline. EL received personal fees from Berry Consultants. JCM received personal fees from AM Pharma (for serving as the chair of a data and safety monitoring board), Gilead (for serving as a consultant), and Critical Care Medicine (for serving as associate editor). SM received grants from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Innovative Medicines Canada, and the Canadian Health Research Foundation. MS-H is supported by the National Institute for Health Research Clinician Scientist Award (NIHR-CS-2016-16-011). The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the UK National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health. JACS is supported by the NIHR Applied Research Collaboration West [ARC West] at University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, supported by NIHR Bristol Biomedical Research Centre at University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol and supported by Health Data Research UK South West. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the NHS, the NIHR, MRC, or the Department of Health and Social Care. Funding StatementNo specific funding was received for this researchAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:All included trials secured institutional review board approval, and informed consent for participation in each trial was obtained, consistent with local institutional review board requirements. Approval was not required for these secondary analyses as all data were published either as part of the prospective meta-analysis and/or in individual trial reports.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data used in this submission is aggregate data and is contained in Table 1 and Figure 3.