Wide variation in practice and dose suggests inconsistent practice and uncertainty in the evidence informing optimal use of cryoprecipitate.

IMPORTANCEOveractivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19.ObjectiveTo determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSIn an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022).INTERVENTIONSPatients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes.RESULTSOn February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes.TRIAL REGISTRATIONClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707

No abstract

Summary Coagulation dysfunction and thrombosis are major complications in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). Patients on oral anticoagulants (OAC) prior to diagnosis of COVID‐19 may therefore have better outcomes. In this multicentre observational study of 5 883 patients (≥18 years) admitted to 26 UK hospitals between 1 April 2020 and 31 July 2020, overall mortality was 29·2%. Incidences of thrombosis, major bleeding (MB) and multiorgan failure (MOF) were 5·4%, 1·7% and 3·3% respectively. The presence of thrombosis, MB, or MOF was associated with a 1·8, 4·5 or 5·9‐fold increased risk of dying, respectively. Of the 5 883 patients studied, 83·6% (n = 4 920) were not on OAC and 16·4% (n = 963) were taking OAC at the time of admission. There was no difference in mortality between patients on OAC vs no OAC prior to admission when compared in an adjusted multivariate analysis [hazard ratio (HR) 1·05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0·93–1·19; P = 0·15] or in an adjusted propensity score analysis (HR 0·92 95% CI 0·58–1·450; P = 0·18). In multivariate and adjusted propensity score analyses, the only significant association of no anticoagulation prior to diagnosis of COVID‐19 was admission to the Intensive‐Care Unit (ICU) (HR 1·98, 95% CI 1·37–2·85). Thrombosis, MB, and MOF were associated with higher mortality. Our results indicate that patients may have benefit from prior OAC use, especially reduced admission to ICU, without any increase in bleeding.

SUMMARYWe present the case of a 60-year-old woman who developed peripheral T-cell lymphoma following successful treatment for high-grade B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. We consider the possible aetiology of this unusual occurrence. We hypothesise that this case represents one of the undiagnosed adult-onset immunodeficiency, in which the pathogenesis of the patient's T-cell lymphoma may have been in part iatrogenic, namely related to previous immunotherapy with rituximab. We feel this case highlights the importance of rebiopsy in patients with recurrent lymphadenopathy and a history of haematological malignancy and hence acts as an important aide memoir in the investigation of such cases. BACKGROUND