ImportanceAcetaminophen (paracetamol) has many pharmacological effects that might be beneficial in sepsis, including inhibition of cell-free hemoglobin-induced oxidation of lipids and other substrates.ObjectiveTo determine whether acetaminophen increases days alive and free of organ dysfunction in sepsis compared with placebo.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsPhase 2b randomized, double-blind, clinical trial conducted from October 2021 to April 2023 with 90-day follow-up. Adults with sepsis and respiratory or circulatory organ dysfunction were enrolled in the emergency department or intensive care unit of 40 US academic hospitals within 36 hours of presentation.InterventionPatients were randomized to 1 g of acetaminophen intravenously every 6 hours or placebo for 5 days.Main Outcome and MeasuresThe primary end point was days alive and free of organ support (mechanical ventilation, vasopressors, and kidney replacement therapy) to day 28. Treatment effect modification was evaluated for acetaminophen by prerandomization plasma cell-free hemoglobin level higher than 10 mg/dL.ResultsOf 447 patients enrolled (mean age, 64 [SD, 15] years, 51% female, mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment [SOFA] score, 5.4 [SD, 2.5]), 227 were randomized to acetaminophen and 220 to placebo. Acetaminophen was safe with no difference in liver enzymes, hypotension, or fluid balance between treatment arms. Days alive and free of organ support to day 28 were not meaningfully different for acetaminophen (20.2 days; 95% CI, 18.8 to 21.6) vs placebo (19.6 days; 95% CI, 18.2 to 21.0; P = .56; difference, 0.6; 95% CI, −1.4 to 2.6). Among 15 secondary outcomes, total, respiratory, and coagulation SOFA scores were significantly lower on days 2 through 4 in the acetaminophen arm as was the rate of development of acute respiratory distress syndrome within 7 days (2.2% vs 8.5% acetaminophen vs placebo; P = .01; difference, −6.3; 95% CI, −10.8 to −1.8). There was no significant interaction between cell-free hemoglobin levels and acetaminophen.Conclusions and RelevanceIntravenous acetaminophen was safe but did not significantly improve days alive and free of organ support in critically ill sepsis patients.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04291508

Introduction Catecholamine vasopressors such as norepinephrine are the standard drugs used to maintain mean arterial pressure during liver transplantation. At high doses, catecholamines may impair organ perfusion. Angiotensin II is a peptide vasoconstrictor that may improve renal perfusion pressure and glomerular filtration rate, a haemodynamic profile that could reduce acute kidney injury. Angiotensin II is approved for vasodilatory shock but has not been rigorously evaluated for treatment of hypotension during liver transplantation. The objective is to assess the efficacy of angiotensin II as a second-line vasopressor infusion during liver transplantation. This trial will establish the efficacy of angiotensin II in decreasing the dose of norepinephrine to maintain adequate blood pressure. Completion of this study will allow design of a follow-up, multicentre trial powered to detect a reduction of organ injury in liver transplantation.Methods and analysis This is a double-blind, randomised clinical trial. Eligible subjects are adults with a Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Sodium Score ≥25 undergoing deceased donor liver transplantation. Subjects are randomised 1:1 to receive angiotensin II or saline placebo as the second-line vasopressor infusion. The study drug infusion is initiated on reaching a norepinephrine dose of 0.05 µg kg-1 min-1 and titrated per protocol. The primary outcome is the dose of norepinephrine required to maintain a mean arterial pressure ≥65 mm Hg. Secondary outcomes include vasopressin or epinephrine requirement and duration of hypotension. Safety outcomes include incidence of thromboembolism within 48 hours of the end of surgery and severe hypertension. An intention-to-treat analysis will be performed for all randomised subjects receiving the study drug. The total dose of norepinephrine will be compared between the two arms by a one-tailed Mann-Whitney U test.Ethics and dissemination The trial protocol was approved by the local Institutional Review Board (#20–30948). Results will be posted on ClinicalTrials.gov and published in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.govNCT04901169

ABSTRACTBackgroundProgressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) is a neurodegenerative disease without approved therapies, and therapeutics are often tried off‐label in the hope of slowing disease progression. Results from these experiences are seldom shared, which limits evidence‐based knowledge to guide future treatment decisions.ObjectivesTo describe an open‐label experience, including safety/tolerability, and longitudinal changes in biomarkers of disease progression in PSP‐Richardson's syndrome (PSP‐RS) patients treated with either salsalate or young plasma and compare to natural history data from previous multicenter studies.MethodsFor 6 months, 10 PSP‐RS patients received daily salsalate 2,250 mg, and 5 patients received monthly infusions of four units of young plasma. Every 3 months, clinical severity was assessed with the Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Rating Scale (PSPRS), and MRI was obtained for volumetric measurement of midbrain. A range of exploratory biomarkers, including cerebrospinal fluid levels of neurofilament light chain, were collected at baseline and 6 months. Interventional data were compared to historical PSP‐RS patients from the davunetide clinical trial and the 4‐Repeat Tauopathy Neuroimaging Initiative.ResultsSalsalate and young plasma were safe and well tolerated. PSPRS change from baseline (mean ± standard deviation [SD]) was similar in salsalate (+5.6 ± 9.6), young plasma (+5.0 ± 7.1), and historical controls (+5.6 ± 7.1), and change in midbrain volume (cm3 ± SD) did not differ between salsalate (–0.07 ± 0.03), young plasma (–0.06 ± 0.03), and historical controls (–0.06 ± 0.04). No differences were observed between groups on any exploratory endpoint.ConclusionsNeither salsalate nor young plasma had a detectable effect on disease progression in PSP‐RS. Focused open‐label clinical trials incorporating historical clinical, neuropsychological, fluid, and imaging biomarkers provide useful preliminary data about the promise of novel PSP‐directed therapies.

Background Memantine has been used off-label to treat frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTD). A previous 26-week open-label study suggested a transient, modest benefit on neuropsychiatric symptoms as measured by the neuropsychiatric inventory (NPI). We aimed to determine whether memantine is an effective treatment for FTD.Methods We did a randomised, parallel group, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 20 mg memantine taken orally daily for 26 weeks in patients with FTD. Participants met Neary criteria for behavioural variant FTD (bvFTD) or semantic dementia and had characteristic brain atrophy. Use of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors was prohibited. Individuals were randomly assigned to receive either memantine or matched placebo tablets (1:1) in blocks of two and four patients. All patients and study personnel were masked to treatment assignment. Primary endpoints were the change in total NPI score and clinical global impression of change (CGIC) score after 26 weeks and were analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT00545974.Findings Of 100 patients screened, 81 were randomly assigned to receive memantine (39 patients) or placebo (42 patients). Five (6%) patients discontinued, and 76 completed the 26-week treatment. Enrolment numbers were lower than planned because of many patients' preference to take memantine or cholinesterase inhibitors off-label rather than participate in a clinical trial. Memantine treatment had no effect on either the NPI (mean difference 2.2, 95% CI -3.9 to 8.3, p=0.47) or CGIC (mean difference 0.0, -0.4 to 0.4, p=0.90) after 26 weeks of treatment. Memantine was generally well tolerated; however, patients in the memantine group had more frequent cognitive adverse events (six patients) than those in the placebo group (one).Interpretation Memantine treatment showed no benefit in patients with FTD. These data do not support memantine use in FTD.