Evidence Hub

Tocilizumab in the treatment of rapidly evolving COVID-19 pneumonia and multifaceted critical illness: A retrospective case series

A. Mady, W. Aletreby, Basheer Abdulrahman, Mohammed Lhmdi, Alfateh Noor, S. Alqahtani, I. Soliman, A. Alharthy et al.

Annals of Medicine and Surgery, 2020

61 participants · 20 citations

Abstract

Background COVID-19 associated critical illness characterized by rapidly evolving acute respiratory failure (ARF) can develop, especially on the grounds of hyperinflammation. Aim and methods A case-series of 61 patients admitted to our intensive care unit (ICU) between August 12 and September 12, 2020 with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia and rapidly evolving ARF requiring oxygen support therapy and/or mechanical ventilation was retrospectively analyzed. We examined whether intravenous administration of tocilizumab, a monoclonal interleukin-6 receptor antibody, was associated with improved outcome. All patients received empiric antivirals, dexamethasone 6 mg/day for 7 days, antibiotics, and prophylactic anticoagulation. Tocilizumab was administered at a dosage of 8 mg/kg [two consecutive intravenous infusions 12 h apart]. Outcome measures such as mortality on day-14, ICU length of stay, and rate of nosocomial acquired bacterial infections were also analyzed. Results: Patients were males (88.2%) aged 51 [interquartile range (IQR): 42.5–58.75)], with admission Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) 4 score of 53 (IQR: 37.75–72.5), and had more than one comorbidity (62.3%). On admission, twenty nine patients (47.5%) were mechanically ventilated, and thirty two patients (52.5%) were receiving oxygen therapy. No serious adverse effects due to tocilizumab therapy were recorded. However, twelve patients (19.6%) developed nosocomial acquired infections. ICU length of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 61 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free