Interleukin-1 and interleukin-6 inhibition compared with standard management in patients with COVID-19 and hyperinflammation: a cohort study.
Journal
The Lancet. Rheumatology
ISSN: 2665-9913
Titre abrégé: Lancet Rheumatol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101765308
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2021
Apr 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
4
3
2021
medline:
4
3
2021
entrez:
3
3
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Patients with severe COVID-19 develop a life-threatening hyperinflammatory response to the virus. Interleukin (IL)-1 or IL-6 inhibitors have been used to treat this patient population, but the comparative effectiveness of these different strategies remains undetermined. We aimed to compare IL-1 and IL-6 inhibition in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, respiratory insufficiency, and hyperinflammation. This cohort study included patients admitted to San Raffaele Hospital (Milan, Italy) with COVID-19, respiratory insufficiency, defined as a ratio of the partial pressure of oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen of 300 mm Hg or less, and hyperinflammation, defined as serum C-reactive protein concentration of 100 mg/L or more or ferritin concentration of 900 ng/mL or more. The primary endpoint was survival, and the secondary endpoint was a composite of death or mechanical ventilation (adverse clinical outcome). Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to compare clinical outcomes of patients receiving IL-1 inhibition (anakinra) or IL-6 inhibition (tocilizumab or sarilumab) with those of patients who did not receive interleukin inhibitors, after accounting for baseline differences. All patients received standard care. Interaction tests were used to assess the probability of survival according to C-reactive protein or lactate dehydrogenase concentrations. Of 392 patients included between Feb 25 and May 20, 2020, 275 did not receive interleukin inhibitors, 62 received the IL-1 inhibitor anakinra, and 55 received an IL-6 inhibitor (29 received tocilizumab and 26 received sarilumab). In the multivariable analysis, compared with patients who did not receive interleukin inhibitors, patients treated with IL-1 inhibition had a significantly reduced mortality risk (hazard ratio [HR] 0·450, 95% CI 0·204-0·990, p=0·047), but those treated with IL-6 inhibition did not (0·900, 0·412-1·966; p=0·79). In the multivariable analysis, there was no difference in adverse clinical outcome risk in patients treated with IL-1 inhibition (HR 0·866, 95% CI 0·482-1·553; p=0·63) or IL-6 inhibition (0·882, 0·452-1·722; p=0·71) relative to patients who did not receive interleukin inhibitors. For increasing C-reactive protein concentrations, patients treated with IL-6 inhibition had a significantly reduced risk of mortality (HR 0·990, 95% CI 0·981-0·999; p=0·031) and adverse clinical outcome (0·987, 0·979-0·995; p=0·0021) compared with patients who did not receive interleukin inhibitors. For decreasing concentrations of serum lactate dehydrogenase, patients treated with an IL-1 inhibitor and patients treated with IL-6 inhibitors had a reduced risk of mortality; increasing concentrations of lactate dehydrogenase in patients receiving either interleukin inhibitor were associated with an increased risk of mortality (HR 1·009, 95% CI 1·003-1·014, p=0·0011 for IL-1 inhibitors and 1·006, 1·001-1·011, p=0·028 for IL-6 inhibitors) and adverse clinical outcome (1·006, 1·002-1·010, p=0·0031 for IL-1 inhibitors and 1·005, 1·001-1·010, p=0·016 for IL-6 inhibitors) compared with patients who did not receive interleukin inhibitors. IL-1 inhibition, but not IL-6 inhibition, was associated with a significant reduction of mortality in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, respiratory insufficiency, and hyperinflammation. IL-6 inhibition was effective in a subgroup of patients with markedly high C-reactive protein concentrations, whereas both IL-1 and IL-6 inhibition were effective in patients with low lactate dehydrogenase concentrations. None.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Patients with severe COVID-19 develop a life-threatening hyperinflammatory response to the virus. Interleukin (IL)-1 or IL-6 inhibitors have been used to treat this patient population, but the comparative effectiveness of these different strategies remains undetermined. We aimed to compare IL-1 and IL-6 inhibition in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, respiratory insufficiency, and hyperinflammation.
METHODS
METHODS
This cohort study included patients admitted to San Raffaele Hospital (Milan, Italy) with COVID-19, respiratory insufficiency, defined as a ratio of the partial pressure of oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen of 300 mm Hg or less, and hyperinflammation, defined as serum C-reactive protein concentration of 100 mg/L or more or ferritin concentration of 900 ng/mL or more. The primary endpoint was survival, and the secondary endpoint was a composite of death or mechanical ventilation (adverse clinical outcome). Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to compare clinical outcomes of patients receiving IL-1 inhibition (anakinra) or IL-6 inhibition (tocilizumab or sarilumab) with those of patients who did not receive interleukin inhibitors, after accounting for baseline differences. All patients received standard care. Interaction tests were used to assess the probability of survival according to C-reactive protein or lactate dehydrogenase concentrations.
FINDINGS
RESULTS
Of 392 patients included between Feb 25 and May 20, 2020, 275 did not receive interleukin inhibitors, 62 received the IL-1 inhibitor anakinra, and 55 received an IL-6 inhibitor (29 received tocilizumab and 26 received sarilumab). In the multivariable analysis, compared with patients who did not receive interleukin inhibitors, patients treated with IL-1 inhibition had a significantly reduced mortality risk (hazard ratio [HR] 0·450, 95% CI 0·204-0·990, p=0·047), but those treated with IL-6 inhibition did not (0·900, 0·412-1·966; p=0·79). In the multivariable analysis, there was no difference in adverse clinical outcome risk in patients treated with IL-1 inhibition (HR 0·866, 95% CI 0·482-1·553; p=0·63) or IL-6 inhibition (0·882, 0·452-1·722; p=0·71) relative to patients who did not receive interleukin inhibitors. For increasing C-reactive protein concentrations, patients treated with IL-6 inhibition had a significantly reduced risk of mortality (HR 0·990, 95% CI 0·981-0·999; p=0·031) and adverse clinical outcome (0·987, 0·979-0·995; p=0·0021) compared with patients who did not receive interleukin inhibitors. For decreasing concentrations of serum lactate dehydrogenase, patients treated with an IL-1 inhibitor and patients treated with IL-6 inhibitors had a reduced risk of mortality; increasing concentrations of lactate dehydrogenase in patients receiving either interleukin inhibitor were associated with an increased risk of mortality (HR 1·009, 95% CI 1·003-1·014, p=0·0011 for IL-1 inhibitors and 1·006, 1·001-1·011, p=0·028 for IL-6 inhibitors) and adverse clinical outcome (1·006, 1·002-1·010, p=0·0031 for IL-1 inhibitors and 1·005, 1·001-1·010, p=0·016 for IL-6 inhibitors) compared with patients who did not receive interleukin inhibitors.
INTERPRETATION
CONCLUSIONS
IL-1 inhibition, but not IL-6 inhibition, was associated with a significant reduction of mortality in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, respiratory insufficiency, and hyperinflammation. IL-6 inhibition was effective in a subgroup of patients with markedly high C-reactive protein concentrations, whereas both IL-1 and IL-6 inhibition were effective in patients with low lactate dehydrogenase concentrations.
FUNDING
BACKGROUND
None.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33655218
doi: 10.1016/S2665-9913(21)00012-6
pii: S2665-9913(21)00012-6
pmc: PMC7906668
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e253-e261Informations de copyright
© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Références
Lancet Rheumatol. 2020 Oct;2(10):e594-e602
pubmed: 32864628
JAMA Intern Med. 2021 Jan 1;181(1):24-31
pubmed: 33080005
J Hosp Med. 2020 Aug;15(8):489-493
pubmed: 32804611
Bioorg Med Chem. 2020 Mar 1;28(5):115327
pubmed: 31992476
N Engl J Med. 2017 Aug 10;377(6):562-572
pubmed: 28792873
Front Immunol. 2018 Apr 13;9:754
pubmed: 29706967
Nature. 2020 Aug;584(7821):430-436
pubmed: 32640463
N Engl J Med. 2020 Dec 10;383(24):2333-2344
pubmed: 33085857
Arthritis Rheumatol. 2020 Feb;72(2):326-334
pubmed: 31513353
Eur Urol. 2019 Jan;75(1):1-2
pubmed: 30327270
Lancet. 2020 Mar 28;395(10229):1033-1034
pubmed: 32192578
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2015 Dec;54(12):2134-44
pubmed: 26209330
Lancet Rheumatol. 2020 Jun;2(6):e325-e331
pubmed: 32501454
N Engl J Med. 2021 Feb 25;384(8):693-704
pubmed: 32678530
Am J Epidemiol. 2008 Feb 15;167(4):492-9
pubmed: 18056625
Eur Urol Oncol. 2018 May;1(1):61-68
pubmed: 31100229
Blood. 2014 Jul 10;124(2):188-95
pubmed: 24876563
JAMA. 2020 May 26;323(20):2052-2059
pubmed: 32320003
Am J Epidemiol. 1999 Jun 1;149(11):981-3
pubmed: 10355372
Rheumatol Ther. 2018 Jun;5(1):21-42
pubmed: 29502236
Intensive Care Med. 2020 May;46(5):846-848
pubmed: 32125452
Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2016 May;12(5):259-68
pubmed: 27009539
Lancet Rheumatol. 2020 Aug;2(8):e474-e484
pubmed: 32835257
Crit Care Resusc. 2020 Apr 01;22(2):91-94
pubmed: 32227819
Lancet Rheumatol. 2020 Jul;2(7):e393-e400
pubmed: 32835245
Blood. 2011 Apr 7;117(14):3720-32
pubmed: 21304099
Crit Care Med. 2016 Feb;44(2):275-81
pubmed: 26584195
BMJ. 2010 Mar 12;340:b5087
pubmed: 20228141
J Clin Rheumatol. 2019 Dec 24;:
pubmed: 31876844
Ann Rheum Dis. 2020 Oct;79(10):1277-1285
pubmed: 32620597
JAMA Intern Med. 2021 Jan 1;181(1):32-40
pubmed: 33080017
Eur J Intern Med. 2020 Jun;76:43-49
pubmed: 32482597
Lancet Rheumatol. 2020 Aug;2(8):e465-e473
pubmed: 32835256