ArticleTurkish thoracic journal2022
Clinical Predictors of Response to Tocilizumab: A Retrospective Multicenter Study.
Article in Turkish thoracic journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of methotrexate and methylprednisolone as addition to antifibrotic therapy in progressive pulmonary fibrosis due to COVID-19.Sarcoidosis, vasculitis, and diffuse lung diseases : official journal of WASOG · 2024Article
- Factors predicting poor outcomes of patients treated with tocilizumab for COVID‑19‑associated pneumonia: A retrospective study.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveA substantial number of patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) demonstrate severe infection. Cytokine storm is an underlying condition that worsens clinical outcomes. As an interleukin-6 receptor antagonist, tocilizumab is a promising treatment option for COVID-19. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical predictors of mortality for critically ill COVID-19 patients receiving tocilizumab therapy. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe retrospective cohort study was conducted in 4 centers' both wards and intensive care units between March 20 and May 20, 2020. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were consecutively drawn from medical records. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality.
resultsIn this study, 39 patients (28.2% female) were included, and the mortality rate was 25.6% (n = 10). There was statistically significant difference between survivor and non-survivor groups regarding age (53.0 (46.5-65.0) vs. 75.0 (68.25-81.25), respectively,P = .001), CALL score (8.0 (7.0-10.0) vs. 12.0 (9.75-13.0), P = .001), GRAM score (119.5 (99.5-142.0) vs. 155.0 (129.8-226.0), P = .004), and white blood cell count (k/mL) (5.6 (3.8-8.6) vs. 8.0 (7.6-9.3), P = .003). The patients who were on invasive mechanical ventilation at the time of tocilizumab administration had a higher mortality rate (100% vs. 25.9%, P < .001). Besides, arterial partial pressure of oxygen/ fraction of inspiratory oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) ratio on day 7, but not on days 0, 1, and 3 of tocilizumab therapy, was associated with mortal- ity. C-reactive protein (mg/dL) tended to be lower in the survivor group; however, it was not statistically significant (68.4 (32.7-157.5) vs. 113.5 (77.7-219.0), P = .058).
conclusionThis study demonstrated that advanced age, increased leukocyte count, higher CALL and GRAM scores, and the need for invasive mechanical ventilation revealed a worse prognosis after tocilizumab treatment.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.