Outcomes

DH David T. Huang
EM Erin K. McCreary
JB J. Ryan Bariola
TM Tami E. Minnier
RW Richard J. Wadas
JS Judith A. Shovel
DA Debbie Albin
OM Oscar C. Marroquin
KK Kevin E. Kip
KC Kevin Collins
MS Mark Schmidhofer
MW Mary Kay Wisniewski
DN David A. Nace
CS Colleen Sullivan
MA Meredith Axe
RM Russell Meyers
AW Alexandra Weissman
WG William Garrard
OP Octavia M. Peck-Palmer
AW Alan Wells
RB Robert D. Bart
AY Anne Yang
LB Lindsay R. Berry
SB Scott Berry
AC Amy M. Crawford
AM Anna McGlothlin
TK Tina Khadem
KL Kelsey Linstrum
SM Stephanie K. Montgomery
DR Daniel Ricketts
JK Jason N. Kennedy
CP Caroline J. Pidro
AN Anna Nakayama
RZ Rachel L. Zapf
PK Paula L. Kip
GH Ghady Haidar
GS Graham M. Snyder
BM Bryan J. McVerry
DY Donald M. Yealy
DA Derek C. Angus
CS Christopher W. Seymour
request Request a Protocol
ask Ask a question
Favorite

For the propensity score–matched cohort study, the primary outcome was hospitalization or death by 28 days. Secondary outcomes included the 28-day hospitalization rate and 28-day mortality rate.

For the randomized comparative effectiveness trial, the primary outcome was hospital-free days up to day 28 after mAb treatment. This outcome was an ordinal end point, with death as the worst outcome (labeled as −1) followed by the length of time alive and free of hospitalization, such that the best outcome would be 28 hospital-free days. If a patient had intervening days free of hospitalization and was then rehospitalized, the patient was given credit for the intervening days as free of hospitalization. We used a different primary outcome for the comparative effectiveness trial vs the cohort study because we hypothesized that, in addition to potential differences in 28-day hospitalization and mortality rates between mAb types (sotrovimab, casirivimab-imdevimab, and casirivimab-imdevimab or sotrovimab), there may be differences in hospital length of stay. The ordinal primary outcome for the trial allowed a single summary measure to encompass these potential differences.

The secondary outcome for the trial was mortality at 28 days. We evaluated outcomes stratified by infusion location (ED vs infusion center) and the frequency of adverse events. We assessed the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 variants in a random subset of enrolled patients and in the Pennsylvania catchment area using GISAID (Global Initiative on Sharing All Influenza Data)7 (eFigure 1 in Supplement 2).

Do you have any questions about this protocol?

Post your question to gather feedback from the community. We will also invite the authors of this article to respond.

0/150

tip Tips for asking effective questions

+ Description

Write a detailed description. Include all information that will help others answer your question including experimental processes, conditions, and relevant images.

post Post a Question
0 Q&A