Pre-print of the #COVIDSTEROID2 RCT comparing dexamethasone 6mg vs 12mg in hospitalized patients on high flow O2 or MV:
- no difference in survival or days free of MV with higher dose dex but…
- interesting “trend towards benefit” w/ higher dose dex
📄medrxiv.org/content/10.110…
1/ ImageImageImageImage
🔑 Question: we know from #RECOVERY that steroids are beneficial in severe COVID, but what’s the ideal dose?

#COVIDSTEROID2 was a large DB multi center RCT to answer this. It randomized patients on high flow O2 or MV to either 6mg or 12mg of dexamethasone for up to 10 days.
2/ ImageImageImageImage
The 1° endpoint was days alive free of lifesupport (MV, ECMO, RRT). 2° endpoints included 28 day mortality.

Based on prior studies, they powered for a 15% relative mortality reduction (ARR ~4.5%) combined w/ a 10% reduction in life support duration.

This is pretty ambitious.
3/ ImageImage
They randomized 1000 people (outcomes were available for 971). The two groups had similar baseline characteristics:
-mostly older (median 65), mostly male (~70%)
-comorbidities were frequent (DM, CHF, CAD, CHF)
~1/2 were on High flow O2, 1/4 on MV, & 1/4 on CPAP at enrollment
4/ Image
The results were interesting.

Compared to 6mg, 12mg of decadron was associated with:
-numerically lower mortality (27.1% vs 32.3%, ARR 5.2%)
-more days free of support (22 vs 20.5)
-lower rates of SAEs (11.3% vs 13.2%)

However NONE of these reached statistical significance
5/ ImageImageImageImage
Slicing the data different ways yields similar findings: the higher dose of dexamethasone is numerically slightly better but doesn’t (quite) achieve statistical significance. ImageImageImage
What can we conclude?

It’s tempting to round “a trend towards benefit” up to “benefit” but this isn’t good science

If we round down a p=0.06 why not, for symmetry, dismiss a p=0.04 as “trending towards insignificant”?

Thresholds may be arbitrary but we shouldn’t just ignore
7/
Perhaps better to put this finding in context in two ways:
1) #RECOVERY demonstrated a huge mortality benefit by ICU standards (NNT 8); it’s hard to power a study to improve on this
2) prior studies (#DEXAARDS) had shown that a higher dose of dex (20mg/day) was safe/effective
8/
The differences b/w studies are germane:
#RECOVERY enrolled all hospitalized people w/ COVID & found a lower dose of 6mg dex was beneficial (but only in people with hypoxemia)
#COVIDSTEROID2 enrolled sicker people (all on O2) and found a “trend towards benefit” at 12 mg dex
9/
#DEXAARDS enrolled people who were even sicker, those on MV who already met criteria for ARDS

This study was pre-COVID but I think we have enough data to say, uncontroversially, that COVID ARDS is ARDS

Thus it’s reasonable to conclude that sicker pts “need” more steroids🤯
10/
Although #COVIDSTEROID2 doesn’t show a clear benefit for higher dose dex, it also demonstrates that 12mg isn’t worse than 6mg. In fact 12mg has numerically fewer serious side effects, including infxn

With diverging KM curves it’ll be interesting to see the 3 & 6 mo follow up
11/ ImageImage
Clinical 🥡:
- this is a *NEGATIVE* study…
- yet there *IS* reason to think that a slightly higher dose dexamethasone (12mg instead of 6mg) may be safe & beneficial in sicker COVID patients (such as those with ARDS on MV)
- looking forward to reading the peer reviewed 📄
12/12
Things NOT to do:
-go above #DEXAARDS dosing; older studies found HARM w/ higher steroid doses in ARDS
-continue for longer than 10 days; NO studies demonstrate benefit for this
-substitute another steroid (unless you need to); no mineralocorticoid effects w/ dex may help
13/12

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Nick Mark MD

Nick Mark MD Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @nickmmark

7 Jun
#ACTION RCT results just published @TheLancet: Another negative study of therapeutic #anticoagulantion (TA) in hospitalized people w/ COVID19:
- TA w/ rivaroxaban didn’t improve survival (or *any* endpoint) vs prophylaxis
- more bleeding with TA
1/
thelancet.com/journals/lance…
The AntiCoagulaTlon cOroNavirus (ACTION) trial was a pragmatic open label RCT at 31 hospitals in 🇧🇷.

It enrolled hospitalized patients with COVID19 & an elevated D-dimer & randomized to TA vs prophylactic anticoagulation (PA).

Aside: not sure how I feel about that acronym...
2/
The intervention was TA with either a DOAC (rivaroxaban) if stable or LMWH (enoxaparin 1mg/kg BID) if unstable vs standard of care prophylaxis (UFH or LMWH).

Crossovers were allowed (eg if someone in the PA developed VTE). They adjusted dosing for renal function.

3/
Read 12 tweets
24 May
Ivermectin proponents point to in vitro studies as proof of efficacy

One problem: the dose required in vitro (IC50) to inhibit #COVID is 30-90x higher than the plasma or tissue levels (Cmax) achieved with a standard 12mg IVM dose

A 🧵 explaining & debunking this myth
1/
First some definitions:
- Cmax is the maximum concentration achieved after a medication is given; it is usually measured in healthy people
- IC50 is the concentration of a drug necessary to inhibit a particular enzyme or process by 50%; it is measured in vitro.

2/
Since the pandemic began, many studies looked at repurposing FDA approved drugs to treat COVID

Literally dozens of candidate drugs have been found that inhibit viral replication in vitro

One of these candidates is ivermectin

But as we will see the devil is in the details...
3/ From https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.20.9997https://storage.googleapis.com/plos-corpus-prod/10.1371/jour
Read 12 tweets
14 May
People are citing reports of declining #COVID cases or deaths after mass #ivermectin distribution.
This is the scientific equivalent of “the rain stopped after I bought an umbrella.”
A short thread about why these “studies” are NOT very compelling.
1/
As cases rise, schools & businesses close, people stay home, nursing homes restrict visitors, masks are mandated, etc

A few desperate governments worldwide distributed ivermectin too

In an uncontrolled situation, why should ivermectin get “credit” for reducing cases/deaths?
2/
This is a classic POST HOC ERGO PROPTER HOC ("after this therefore because of this") fallacy.

Ivermectin distribution is usually a last-ditch effort, like buying an umbrella as you are getting soaked.

But the natural history of pandemics is to peak, then decrease.
3/
Read 8 tweets
8 May
A few years ago I wrote about the problem with vitamin C in sepsis.

It’s not that vitamin C is harmful (it probably isn’t) or that it’s ineffective (it almost certainly is) but that embracing pseudoscience undermines evidence based practice.

1/
pulmccm.org/critical-care-…
It took a half dozen high quality RCTs to refute one uncontrolled study of 47 people.


Most have given up on the “metabolic cure for sepsis” (with notable exceptions).

Why are “simple, cheap” therapies so alluring? and what can we learn about COVID?
2/
These pseudoscientific “miracle cures” exploit our desire to help our patients and appeal to several common cognitive biases and delusions.

🚩 Let’s run through some of the red flags of miracle cures:
3/
Read 16 tweets
19 Mar
#INSPIRATION RCT comparing intermediate vs standard dose DVT prophylaxis, just published @jama:
-no benefit to additional anticoag in ICU patients w/ #COVID19:no reduction in mortality, MV, LOS or any 2° endpoint
-time to rethink COVID #anticoagulation?
1/
bit.ly/3vCluqK ImageImageImageImage
INSPIRATION was a 10 site open-label RCT in 🇮🇷 comparing intermediate vs standard dose prophylaxis in ICU patients with PCR-confirmed #COVID19.

LMWH was the primary intervention (~40 mg vs 1mg/kg daily), dosed appropriately for weight; UFH was used if the GFR was too low.
2/
Overall the groups were balanced (total n=562) & were fairly representative of US ICU cohorts with COVID19.

The use of HFNC was very low (~3%) compared to in the US, which may reflect different practice patterns/availability.

Most patients (>90%) received corticosteroids
3/ Image
Read 9 tweets
12 Mar
Pre-print of the @remap_cap RCT of #anticoagulation for ICU patients w/ #COVID19 adds details but confirms what we learned from the press release:
- no improvement in survival or organ failure w/ therapeutic (TA) vs prophylactic anticoagulation (PA)
- medrxiv.org/content/10.110…
1/ ImageImageImage
This study is the amalgam of 3 large platform RCTs of TA in COVID19: @remap_cap @ACTIV4a & ATTACC.

Each trial was administered separately but as much as possible they harmonized the design so the results could be analyzed together. (a pragmatic way to enroll more pts faster)
2/ Image
There were some differences:
-REMAP enrolled suspected & confirmed infxn; the others only enrolled confirmed
-choice of anticoagulant varied
-most importantly, the definition of prophylaxis: ~1/2 the sites used standard low-dose heparin, the remainder used “intermediate dose”
3/ Image
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(