Baricitinib versus tocilizumab in critically ill COVID‐19 patients: A retrospective cohort study

Objectives The immunomodulators tocilizumab and baricitinib improve outcomes in severely ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19); however, comparative analyses of clinical outcomes related to these agents are lacking. A tocilizumab national shortage shifted treatment to baricitinib in...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Pharmacotherapy 2024-01, Vol.44 (1), p.28-38
Hauptverfasser: Conroy, Grace M., Bauer, Seth R., Pallotta, Andrea M., Duggal, Abhijit, Wang, Lu, Sacha, Gretchen L.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objectives The immunomodulators tocilizumab and baricitinib improve outcomes in severely ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19); however, comparative analyses of clinical outcomes related to these agents are lacking. A tocilizumab national shortage shifted treatment to baricitinib in critically ill patients, allowing for an outcome comparison in a similar population. The purpose of this study is to compare clinical outcomes in critically ill COVID‐19 patients who received tocilizumab and those who received baricitinib. Design Retrospective, observational cohort study using generalized estimating equation models, accounting for clustering by hospital and known confounders, to estimate the proportional odds of the ordinal World Health Organization Clinical Progression Scale (WHO‐CPS) score at day 14, the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included WHO‐CPS score at day 7. Setting Multiple hospitals within the Cleveland Clinic Health System. Patients Adult patients admitted for COVID‐19 between January 2021 and November 2021. Interventions Receipt of tocilizumab, before its shortage, or baricitinib, during shortage. Measurements and Main Results In total, 507 patients were included; 217 received tocilizumab and 290 received baricitinib. Over 96% of patients required ICU admission and 98% received concomitant dexamethasone. Tocilizumab recipients had higher (worse) baseline WHO‐CPS scores. After adjustment, tocilizumab use was associated with higher odds of a worse day 14 WHO‐CPS score compared with baricitinib (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.65 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10–2.48]). Similarly, after adjustment, tocilizumab use was associated with higher odds of a worse day 7 WHO‐CPS score (adjusted OR 1.65 [95% CI 1.22–2.24]). Conclusions Baricitinib use was associated with better WHO‐CPS scores at day 14 and day 7 compared with tocilizumab in a cohort of critically ill patients with COVID‐19. The odds of having a one unit increase in WHO‐CPS score at day 14 was 71% higher with tocilizumab than baricitinib. No difference in mortality or adverse effects was noted.
ISSN:0277-0008
1875-9114
1875-9114
DOI:10.1002/phar.2867