Faculty Bibliography
Searched for:
in-biosketch:yes
person:troxea01
Total Results:
409
Efficacy and Safety of COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma in Hospitalized Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Importance/UNASSIGNED:There is clinical equipoise for COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) use in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To determine the safety and efficacy of CCP compared with placebo in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 receiving noninvasive supplemental oxygen. Design, Setting, and Participants/UNASSIGNED:CONTAIN COVID-19, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of CCP in hospitalized adults with COVID-19, was conducted at 21 US hospitals from April 17, 2020, to March 15, 2021. The trial enrolled 941 participants who were hospitalized for 3 or less days or presented 7 or less days after symptom onset and required noninvasive oxygen supplementation. Interventions/UNASSIGNED:A unit of approximately 250 mL of CCP or equivalent volume of placebo (normal saline). Main Outcomes and Measures/UNASSIGNED:The primary outcome was participant scores on the 11-point World Health Organization (WHO) Ordinal Scale for Clinical Improvement on day 14 after randomization; the secondary outcome was WHO scores determined on day 28. Subgroups were analyzed with respect to age, baseline WHO score, concomitant medications, symptom duration, CCP SARS-CoV-2 titer, baseline SARS-CoV-2 serostatus, and enrollment quarter. Outcomes were analyzed using a bayesian proportional cumulative odds model. Efficacy of CCP was defined as a cumulative adjusted odds ratio (cOR) less than 1 and a clinically meaningful effect as cOR less than 0.8. Results/UNASSIGNED:Of 941 participants randomized (473 to placebo and 468 to CCP), 556 were men (59.1%); median age was 63 years (IQR, 52-73); 373 (39.6%) were Hispanic and 132 (14.0%) were non-Hispanic Black. The cOR for the primary outcome adjusted for site, baseline risk, WHO score, age, sex, and symptom duration was 0.94 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.75-1.18) with posterior probability (P[cOR<1] = 72%); the cOR for the secondary adjusted outcome was 0.92 (95% CrI, 0.74-1.16; P[cOR<1] = 76%). Exploratory subgroup analyses suggested heterogeneity of treatment effect: at day 28, cORs were 0.72 (95% CrI, 0.46-1.13; P[cOR<1] = 93%) for participants enrolled in April-June 2020 and 0.65 (95% CrI, 0.41 to 1.02; P[cOR<1] = 97%) for those not receiving remdesivir and not receiving corticosteroids at randomization. Median CCP SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing titer used in April to June 2020 was 1:175 (IQR, 76-379). Any adverse events (excluding transfusion reactions) were reported for 39 (8.2%) placebo recipients and 44 (9.4%) CCP recipients (P = .57). Transfusion reactions occurred in 2 (0.4) placebo recipients and 8 (1.7) CCP recipients (P = .06). Conclusions and Relevance/UNASSIGNED:In this trial, CCP did not meet the prespecified primary and secondary outcomes for CCP efficacy. However, high-titer CCP may have benefited participants early in the pandemic when remdesivir and corticosteroids were not in use. Trial Registration/UNASSIGNED:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04364737.
PMID: 34901997
ISSN: 2168-6114
CID: 5084962
Incarceration and Subsequent Pregnancy Loss: Exploration of Sexually Transmitted Infections as Mediating Pathways
PMID: 34061656
ISSN: 1931-843x
CID: 4907302
The Electronic Health Record as the Primary Data Source in a Pragmatic Trial: A Case Study
HIGHLIGHTS/CONCLUSIONS:Electronic health records are not a single system but a series of overlapping and legacy systems that require time and expertise to use efficiently.Commonly measured patient characteristics such as weight and body mass index are relatively easy to locate for most trial enrollees but less common characteristics, like ejection fraction, are not.Acquiring essential supplementary data-in this trial, state data on hospital admission-can be a lengthy and difficult process.
PMID: 35018863
ISSN: 1552-681x
CID: 5118722
Development and Validation of a Treatment Benefit Index to Identify Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 Who May Benefit From Convalescent Plasma
Importance:Identifying which patients with COVID-19 are likely to benefit from COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) treatment may have a large public health impact. Objective:To develop an index for predicting the expected relative treatment benefit from CCP compared with treatment without CCP for patients hospitalized for COVID-19 using patients' baseline characteristics. Design, Setting, and Participants:This prognostic study used data from the COMPILE study, ie, a meta-analysis of pooled individual patient data from 8 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating CCP vs control in adults hospitalized for COVID-19 who were not receiving mechanical ventilation at randomization. A combination of baseline characteristics, termed the treatment benefit index (TBI), was developed based on 2287 patients in COMPILE using a proportional odds model, with baseline characteristics selected via cross-validation. The TBI was externally validated on 4 external data sets: the Expanded Access Program (1896 participants), a study conducted under Emergency Use Authorization (210 participants), and 2 RCTs (with 80 and 309 participants). Exposure:Receipt of CCP. Main Outcomes and Measures:World Health Organization (WHO) 11-point ordinal COVID-19 clinical status scale and 2 derivatives of it (ie, WHO score of 7-10, indicating mechanical ventilation to death, and WHO score of 10, indicating death) at day 14 and day 28 after randomization. Day 14 WHO 11-point ordinal scale was used as the primary outcome to develop the TBI. Results:A total of 2287 patients were included in the derivation cohort, with a mean (SD) age of 60.3 (15.2) years and 815 (35.6%) women. The TBI provided a continuous gradation of benefit, and, for clinical utility, it was operationalized into groups of expected large clinical benefit (B1; 629 participants in the derivation cohort [27.5%]), moderate benefit (B2; 953 [41.7%]), and potential harm or no benefit (B3; 705 [30.8%]). Patients with preexisting conditions (diabetes, cardiovascular and pulmonary diseases), with blood type A or AB, and at an early COVID-19 stage (low baseline WHO scores) were expected to benefit most, while those without preexisting conditions and at more advanced stages of COVID-19 could potentially be harmed. In the derivation cohort, odds ratios for worse outcome, where smaller odds ratios indicate larger benefit from CCP, were 0.69 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.48-1.06) for B1, 0.82 (95% CrI, 0.61-1.11) for B2, and 1.58 (95% CrI, 1.14-2.17) for B3. Testing on 4 external datasets supported the validation of the derived TBIs. Conclusions and Relevance:The findings of this study suggest that the CCP TBI is a simple tool that can quantify the relative benefit from CCP treatment for an individual patient hospitalized with COVID-19 that can be used to guide treatment recommendations. The TBI precision medicine approach could be especially helpful in a pandemic.
PMCID:8790670
PMID: 35076698
ISSN: 2574-3805
CID: 5153212
Association of Convalescent Plasma Treatment With Clinical Status in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: A Meta-analysis
Importance:COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) is a potentially beneficial treatment for COVID-19 that requires rigorous testing. Objective:To compile individual patient data from randomized clinical trials of CCP and to monitor the data until completion or until accumulated evidence enables reliable conclusions regarding the clinical outcomes associated with CCP. Data Sources:From May to August 2020, a systematic search was performed for trials of CCP in the literature, clinical trial registry sites, and medRxiv. Domain experts at local, national, and international organizations were consulted regularly. Study Selection:Eligible trials enrolled hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19, not receiving mechanical ventilation, and randomized them to CCP or control. The administered CCP was required to have measurable antibodies assessed locally. Data Extraction and Synthesis:A minimal data set was submitted regularly via a secure portal, analyzed using a prespecified bayesian statistical plan, and reviewed frequently by a collective data and safety monitoring board. Main Outcomes and Measures:Prespecified coprimary end points-the World Health Organization (WHO) 11-point ordinal scale analyzed using a proportional odds model and a binary indicator of WHO score of 7 or higher capturing the most severe outcomes including mechanical ventilation through death and analyzed using a logistic model-were assessed clinically at 14 days after randomization. Results:Eight international trials collectively enrolled 2369 participants (1138 randomized to control and 1231 randomized to CCP). A total of 2341 participants (median [IQR] age, 60 [50-72] years; 845 women [35.7%]) had primary outcome data as of April 2021. The median (IQR) of the ordinal WHO scale was 3 (3-6); the cumulative OR was 0.94 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.74-1.19; posterior probability of OR <1 of 71%). A total of 352 patients (15%) had WHO score greater than or equal to 7; the OR was 0.94 (95% CrI, 0.69-1.30; posterior probability of OR <1 of 65%). Adjusted for baseline covariates, the ORs for mortality were 0.88 at day 14 (95% CrI, 0.61-1.26; posterior probability of OR <1 of 77%) and 0.85 at day 28 (95% CrI, 0.62-1.18; posterior probability of OR <1 of 84%). Heterogeneity of treatment effect sizes was observed across an array of baseline characteristics. Conclusions and Relevance:This meta-analysis found no association of CCP with better clinical outcomes for the typical patient. These findings suggest that real-time individual patient data pooling and meta-analysis during a pandemic are feasible, offering a model for future research and providing a rich data resource.
PMCID:8790669
PMID: 35076699
ISSN: 2574-3805
CID: 5153222
A phase 1/2 multicenter investigator-initiated trial of DKN-01 as monotherapy or in combination with docetaxel for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). [Meeting Abstract]
ISI:000863680301467
ISSN: 0732-183x
CID: 5525642
Clinical and genomic signatures of rising SARS-CoV-2 Delta breakthrough infections in New York
In 2021, Delta has become the predominant SARS-CoV-2 variant worldwide. While vaccines effectively prevent COVID-19 hospitalization and death, vaccine breakthrough infections increasingly occur. The precise role of clinical and genomic determinants in Delta infections is not known, and whether they contribute to increased rates of breakthrough infections compared to unvaccinated controls. Here, we show a steep and near complete replacement of circulating variants with Delta between May and August 2021 in metropolitan New York. We observed an increase of the Delta sublineage AY.25, its spike mutation S112L, and nsp12 mutation F192V in breakthroughs. Delta infections were associated with younger age and lower hospitalization rates than Alpha. Delta breakthroughs increased significantly with time since vaccination, and, after adjusting for confounders, they rose at similar rates as in unvaccinated individuals. Our data indicate a limited impact of vaccine escape in favor of Delta's increased epidemic growth in times of waning vaccine protection.
PMCID:8669846
PMID: 34909779
ISSN: n/a
CID: 5085062
Robust index of confidence weighted learning for optimal individualized treatment rule estimation
Determination of optimal individual treatment rules (ITR) is a rapidly growing area in precision medicine; various parametric and non-parametric methods have been proposed. Existing methods, however, focus on the mean outcome and thus are sensitive to outliers, skewed and heavy-tailed outcome distributions. In this paper, we propose an optimal ITR estimation framework using a weighted classifier with robust weights based on measures of similarity. Compared to previous methods in the literature, this two-stage nonparametric model is novel and enjoys several advantages. First, due to its non-parametric nature, it is more flexible than regression-based parametric and semi-parametric models. Second, the similarity-based confidence index is essentially a weighted sum of indicator functions depending on the sign of pairwise outcome differences; therefore, it is robust to outliers, skewed and heavy-tailed outcome distributions. The performance of the proposed approach is demonstrated via simulation studies and an analysis of data from a randomized clinical trial for depression.
SCOPUS:85121322571
ISSN: 2049-1573
CID: 5115202
Toxic Metabolic Encephalopathy in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19
BACKGROUND:Toxic metabolic encephalopathy (TME) has been reported in 7-31% of hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); however, some reports include sedation-related delirium and few data exist on the etiology of TME. We aimed to identify the prevalence, etiologies, and mortality rates associated with TME in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-positive patients. METHODS:We conducted a retrospective, multicenter, observational cohort study among patients with reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection hospitalized at four New York City hospitals in the same health network between March 1, 2020, and May 20, 2020. TME was diagnosed in patients with altered mental status off sedation or after an adequate sedation washout. Patients with structural brain disease, seizures, or primary neurological diagnoses were excluded. The coprimary outcomes were the prevalence of TME stratified by etiology and in-hospital mortality (excluding comfort care only patients) assessed by using a multivariable time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models with adjustment for age, race, sex, intubation, intensive care unit requirement, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores, hospital location, and date of admission. RESULTS:Among 4491 patients with COVID-19, 559 (12%) were diagnosed with TME, of whom 435 of 559 (78%) developed encephalopathy immediately prior to hospital admission. The most common etiologies were septic encephalopathy (n = 247 of 559 [62%]), hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) (n = 331 of 559 [59%]), and uremia (n = 156 of 559 [28%]). Multiple etiologies were present in 435 (78%) patients. Compared with those without TME (n = 3932), patients with TME were older (76 vs. 62 years), had dementia (27% vs. 3%) or psychiatric history (20% vs. 10%), were more often intubated (37% vs. 20%), had a longer hospital length of stay (7.9 vs. 6.0 days), and were less often discharged home (25% vs. 66% [all P < 0.001]). Excluding comfort care patients (n = 267 of 4491 [6%]) and after adjustment for confounders, TME remained associated with increased risk of in-hospital death (n = 128 of 425 [30%] patients with TME died, compared with n = 600 of 3799 [16%] patients without TME; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.24, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-1.52, P = 0.031), and TME due to hypoxemia conferred the highest risk (n = 97 of 233 [42%] patients with HIE died, compared with n = 631 of 3991 [16%] patients without HIE; aHR 1.56, 95% CI 1.21-2.00, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:TME occurred in one in eight hospitalized patients with COVID-19, was typically multifactorial, and was most often due to hypoxemia, sepsis, and uremia. After we adjustment for confounding factors, TME was associated with a 24% increased risk of in-hospital mortality.
PMCID:7962078
PMID: 33725290
ISSN: 1556-0961
CID: 4817682
Meeting the challenges of retention and enrollment of study participants in clinical trials during the COVID-19 pandemic from the study leadership perspective: Experience from the Zoster Eye Disease Study (ZEDS)
Purpose/UNASSIGNED:To describe steps taken that enabled a high rate of retention and early resumption of enrollment in the Zoster Eye Disease Study (ZEDS), a randomized controlled trial funded by the National Eye Institute, during the first 13 months (3/1/2020-3/31/2021) of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods/UNASSIGNED:A number of responses were implemented in ZEDS when the focus shifted to retention of study participants at the beginning of the pandemic including frequent communication with the participating clinical centers (PCCs) about remote visits, local lab work, shipping study medication, and completion of revised case report forms. Additional payments were provided to the PCCs. Remote activation of PCCs continued. Screening and enrollment visits gradually resumed when allowed. Results/UNASSIGNED:Communication with PCCs increased, and average attendance at monthly coordinator teleconferences went up from 17 to 47. Remote visits peaked in April 2020, accounting for 75% (33/44) of study visits, then declined to less than 10% of study visits beginning August 2020. Overall, 97% (590/609) of study visits were completed. Only 5.5% (9/165) of study participants withdrew consent, and 2.4% (4/165) were lost to follow-up. Enrollment returned to pre-pandemic levels by September 2020. Discussion/UNASSIGNED:Strong communication and unwavering commitment, combined with the technological capability for remote work, visits, and shipment of study medication, were key to the successful retention of study participants and resumption of enrollment. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:Rapid responses to challenges to trials caused by the COVID-19 pandemic can enable them to continue successfully and provide insights into the planning of future trials.
PMCID:8592850
PMID: 34805615
ISSN: 2451-8654
CID: 5063272
