Senescent immune cells exhibit altered gene expression and resistance to apoptosis. The prevalence of these cells increases with age and emerging data implicate senescence-associated maladaptive signaling as a potential contributor to sepsis and septic shock. The senolytic drug fisetin promotes clearance of senescent cells and is hypothesized to mitigate septic responses to infection. We are conducting a multi-center, randomized, double-blinded, adaptive allocation phase 2 clinical trial to assess the efficacy of the senolytic drug fisetin in preventing clinical deterioration of elderly patients diagnosed with sepsis. We intend to enroll and randomize 220 elderly patients (age > 65) with the clinical diagnosis of sepsis to receive either fisetin as a single oral dose of 20 mg/kg, fisetin in two oral doses of 20 mg/kg each spaced 1 day apart, or placebo. The primary outcome will be changed in the composite of cardiovascular, respiratory, and renal sequential organ failure assessment scores at 7 days from enrollment. Secondary outcomes include quantification of senescent CD3 + cells at 7 days, and 28-day assessments of organ failure-free days, days in an intensive care unit, and all-cause mortality. This multi-center, randomized, double-blinded trial will assess the efficacy of fisetin in preventing clinical deterioration in elderly patients with sepsis and measure the effects of this drug on the prevalence of senescent immune cells. We intend that the results of this phase 2 trial will inform the design of a larger phase 3 study. This trial is registered to ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT05758246, first posted on March 7, 2023.

IMPORTANCE:. Provider staffing models for ICUs are generally based on pragmatic necessities and historical norms at individual institutions. A better understanding of the role that provider staffing models play in determining patient outcomes and optimizing use of ICU resources is needed. OBJECTIVES:. To explore the impact of transitioning from a low- to high-intensity intensivist staffing model on patient outcomes and unit composition. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:. This was a prospective observational before-and-after study of adult ICU patients admitted to a single community hospital ICU before (October 2016–May 2017) and after (June 2017–November 2017) the transition to a high-intensity ICU staffing model. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality, ICU length of stay (LOS), and unit composition characteristics including type (e.g., medical, surgical) and purpose (ICU-specific intervention vs close monitoring only) of admission. RESULTS:. For the primary outcome, 1,219 subjects were included (779 low-intensity, 440 high-intensity). In multivariable analysis, the transition to a high-intensity staffing model was not associated with a decrease in 30-day (odds ratio [OR], 0.90; 95% CI, 0.61–1.34; p = 0.62) or in-hospital (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.57–1.38; p = 0.60) mortality, nor ICU LOS. However, the proportion of patients admitted to the ICU without an ICU-specific need did decrease under the high-intensity staffing model (27.2% low-intensity to 17.5% high-intensity; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:. Multivariable analysis showed no association between transition to a high-intensity ICU staffing model and mortality or LOS outcomes; however, the proportion of patients admitted without an ICU-specific need decreased under the high-intensity model. Further research is needed to determine whether a high-intensity staffing model may lead to more efficient ICU bed usage.

Background Mechanically ventilated patients experience anxiety for many reasons. Pharmacological treatments such as benzodiazepines are commonly employed to manage anxiety; however, these therapies often cause undesired side effects. Additional therapies for anxiety management are needed. We sought to determine whether cell phone-based virtual reality therapy could feasibly be used for anxiety management in mechanically ventilated patients. Methods Mechanically ventilated subjects underwent at least one session of virtual reality therapy in which they were shown a cinematic video of an outdoor green space or blue space with 360° visual range of motion. Goal session duration was 5 minutes. The primary outcome was incidence of predefined patient safety events, including self-extubation and accidental removal of tubes or lines. Results Ten subjects underwent a total of 18 virtual reality sessions. Fifteen sessions lasted the planned 5 minutes, one session was extended at participant request, and two sessions were terminated early at participant request. There were no occurrences of the predefined safety events, and no occurrences of cybersickness. Use of a visual analog scale to measure anxiety level was feasible for this pilot study, demonstrating feasibility of this scale for future, larger scale studies. Conclusions Virtual reality therapy shows potential as a means of managing anxiety in patients undergoing mechanical ventilation, and further rigorous exploration with this protocol is feasible.

Background SARS-CoV-2 viral entry may disrupt angiotensin II (Ang II) homeostasis in part via ACE2 downregulation, potentially contributing to COVID-19 induced lung injury. Preclinical models of viral pneumonias that utilize ACE2 demonstrate Ang II type 1 receptor (AT1R) blockade mitigates lung injury, though observational COVID-19 data addressing the effect of AT1R blockade remain mixed. Methods Multicenter, blinded, placebo-controlled randomized trial of losartan (50 mg PO twice daily for 10 days) versus placebo. Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and a respiratory sequential organ failure assessment score of at least 1 and not already taking a renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor were eligible. The primary outcome was the imputed partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO 2 /FiO 2 ) ratio at 7 days. Secondary outcomes included ordinal COVID-19 severity, oxygen, ventilator, and vasopressor-free days, and mortality. Losartan pharmacokinetics (PK) and RAAS components [Ang II, angiotensin-(1–7) (Ang-(1–7)), ACE, ACE2] were measured in a subgroup of participants. Findings From April 2020 - February 2021, 205 participants were randomized, 101 to losartan and 104 to placebo. Compared to placebo, losartan did not significantly affect PaO 2 /FiO 2 ratio at 7 days [difference of -24.8 (95% -55.6 to 6.1; p=0.12)]. Losartan did not improve any secondary clinical outcome, but worsened vasopressor-free days. PK data were consistent with appropriate steady-state concentrations, but we observed no significant effect of losartan on RAAS components. Interpretation Initiation of orally administered losartan to hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and acute lung injury does not improve PaO 2 / FiO 2 ratio at 7 days. These data may have implications for ongoing clinical trials. Trial Registration Losartan for Patients With COVID-19 Requiring Hospitalization ( NCT04312009 ), https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04312009

OBJECTIVES:To determine whether IV vitamin C therapy reduces 28-day mortality in patients with septic shock. DESIGN:Multicenter, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial. SETTING:One academic medical ICU and four community ICUs. PATIENTS:Of 167 adult patients within 24 hours of vasopressor initiation for septic shock, 126 consented to participation, and 124 received study drug and were included in analysis. INTERVENTIONS:IV vitamin C (10 mg/mL in normal saline) administered as a 1,000-mg bolus over 30 minutes followed by continuous infusion of 250 mg/hr for 96 hours or placebo of equal volumes of normal saline. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Of 124 subjects receiving study drug and included in analysis, 60 received vitamin C and 64 placebo. The primary outcome of all-cause 28-day mortality (vitamin C, 26.7%; placebo, 40.6%; p = 0.10) was lower in the vitamin C arm but did not reach statistical significance. Initiation of renal replacement therapy was higher in the vitamin C arm (vitamin C, 16.7%; placebo, 3.3%; p = 0.015), as was volume of fluid administration within 6 hours of study drug initiation (vitamin C, 1.07 L; placebo, 0.76 L; p = 0.03). There were no statistically significant differences in other secondary outcomes. In post hoc subgroup analysis, there was a decrease in 28-day mortality in the vitamin C arm among patients requiring positive-pressure ventilation at the time of enrollment (vitamin C, 36.3%; placebo, 60.0%; p = 0.05). This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov under identifier NCT03338569. CONCLUSIONS:Vitamin C monotherapy failed to significantly reduce mortality in septic shock patients as hypothesized. Our findings do not support its routine clinical use for this purpose.

Background: The SARS-CoV-2 virus enters cells via the ACE2 receptor, disrupting the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone axis, potentially contributing to lung injury. Treatment with angiotensin receptor blockers(ARBs) may mitigate these effects, though induction of ACE2 expression could increase viral entry, replication, and worsen disease.Methods: This study represents a placebo-controlled blinded randomized clinical trial (RCT) to test the efficacy of losartan on outpatients with COVID-19 across three hospital systems in Minnesota, U.S. Participants included symptomatic outpatients with COVID-19 not already taking ACE-inhibitors or ARBs, enrolled within 7 days of symptom onset. Patients were randomized to losartan versus placebo for 10 days. The primary outcome was all-cause hospitalization within 15 days. Secondary outcomes included functional status, dyspnea, temperature, and viral load.Findings: From April-November 2020, 117 participants were randomized 58 to losartan and 59 to placebo. The primary outcome did not differ significantly between the two arms based on Barnard's test [losartan arm: 3 events (5.2%; 95% CI 1.8-14.1%) versus placebo arm: 1 event (1.7% 95% CI 0.01-9.0%); proportion difference -3.5% (95% CI -12.7-4.5%); p=0.32]. Functional status, self-reported dyspnea, maximum daily temperatures, and viral load were not significantly different between treatment groups. Due to a lower than expected hospitalization rate and low likelihood of a clinically important treatment effect, the trial was terminated early.Interpretation: In this multicenter blinded RCT for outpatients with mild symptomatic COVID-19 disease, losartan did not significantly reduce hospitalizations, affect functional status or assessment of dyspnea. Viral load was not significantly affected by treatment. This study does not support initiation of losartan for low-risk outpatients.Trial Registration: The trial was conducted under the authority of the Food and Drug Administration (IND 148365), was registered on clinicaltrials.gov prior to study initialization (NCT04311177).Funding Statement: This study was supported by Minnesota Partnership for Biotechnology and Medical Genomics (CON000000076883)Declaration of Interests: The authors have no financial conflicts of interest to disclose. MAP, MHN, TWS, and CJT have received additional funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to conduct a clinical trial of losartan in inpatients with COVID-19.Ethics Approval Statement: The protocol was approved by a central institutional review board and underwent local context review. The study was conducted following good clinical practice guidelines under the oversight of an independent data safety monitoring board (DSMB).