Belhassen-García Moncef, Sánchez-Puente Antonio, Dorado-Díaz Pedro-Ignacio, López-Bernús Amparo, Sampedro-Gómez Jesús, Azibeiro-Melchor Raúl, Marcano-Millán Edgard, Rodríguez-Alonso Beatriz, Sánchez-Barrado María-Elisa, Hernández-García Ignacio, Madruga Ignacio, Hernández-Pérez Guillermo, Carbonell Cristina, García-Aparicio Judit, Burgos Laura, López-Sánchez Eugenia, Reina Carlos, Ramón Ana-María, Cestero-Ramírez Laura, Boumhir Fátima, Encinas-Sánchez Daniel, Sánchez-Ledesma María, Herráez Jacinto, Araoz Patricia, Sánchez-Crespo María-José, Rodríguez-Rodríguez Sandra, Rodríguez-Gude Ana-Elisa, Sánchez-Hernández Miguel-Vicente, Borrás Rafael, Sagredo-Meneses Víctor, Sánchez Pedro-Luis, Marcos Miguel, Martín-Oterino José-Ángel
Infectious Diseases Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, University Hospital of Salamanca-IBSAL, 37007 Salamanca, Spain.
Centro de Investigación de Enfermedades Tropicales de la Universidad de Salamanca (CIETUS), University of Salamanca, 37007 Salamanca, Spain.
J Clin Med. 2021 Dec 30;11(1):198. doi: 10.3390/jcm11010198.
The evidence for the efficacy of glucocorticoids combined with tocilizumab (TCZ) in COVID-19 comes from observational studies or subgroup analysis. Our aim was to compare outcomes between hospitalized COVID-19 patients who received high-dose corticosteroid pulse therapy and TCZ and those who received TCZ.
A retrospective single-center study was performed on consecutive hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 between 1 March and 23 April 2020. Patients treated with either TCZ (400-600 mg, one to two doses) and methylprednisolone pulses (MPD-TCZ group) or TCZ alone were analyzed for the occurrence of a combined endpoint of death and need for invasive mechanical ventilation during admission. The independence of both treatment groups was tested using machine learning classifiers, and relevant variables that were potentially different between the groups were measured through a mean decrease accuracy algorithm.
An earlier date of admission was significantly associated with worse outcomes regardless of treatment type. Twenty patients died (27.0%) in the TCZ group, and 33 (44.6%) died or required intubation ( = 74), whereas in the MPD-TCZ group, 15 (11.0%) patients died and 29 (21.3%) patients reached the combined endpoint ( = 136; = 0.006 and < 0.001, respectively). Machine learning methodology using a random forest classifier confirmed significant differences between the treatment groups.
MPD and TCZ improved outcomes (death and invasive mechanical ventilation) among hospitalized COVID-19 patients, but confounding variables such as the date of admission during the COVID-19 pandemic should be considered in observational studies.
糖皮质激素联合托珠单抗(TCZ)治疗新型冠状病毒肺炎(COVID-19)的疗效证据来自观察性研究或亚组分析。我们的目的是比较接受大剂量糖皮质激素冲击治疗联合TCZ的住院COVID-19患者与接受TCZ治疗的患者的结局。
对2020年3月1日至4月23日期间连续住院的重症COVID-19患者进行一项回顾性单中心研究。分析接受TCZ(400 - 600 mg,1 - 2剂)联合甲泼尼龙冲击治疗(MPD-TCZ组)或仅接受TCZ治疗的患者在住院期间死亡和需要有创机械通气这一联合终点事件的发生情况。使用机器学习分类器检验两个治疗组的独立性,并通过平均精度下降算法测量两组之间可能存在差异的相关变量。
无论治疗类型如何,较早的入院日期都与较差的结局显著相关。TCZ组有20例患者死亡(27.0%),74例中有33例(44.6%)死亡或需要插管;而在MPD-TCZ组,136例中有15例(11.0%)患者死亡,29例(21.3%)患者达到联合终点(分别为P = 0.006和P < 0.001)。使用随机森林分类器的机器学习方法证实了治疗组之间存在显著差异。
MPD和TCZ改善了住院COVID-19患者的结局(死亡和有创机械通气),但在观察性研究中应考虑COVID-19大流行期间入院日期等混杂变量。