Explore the vast range of titles available.

Critical illness in COVID-19 is an extreme and clinically homogeneous disease phenotype that we have previously shown 1 to be highly efficient for discovery of genetic associations 2 . Despite the advanced stage of illness at presentation, we have shown that host genetics in patients who are critically ill with COVID-19 can identify immunomodulatory therapies with strong beneficial effects in this group 3 . Here we analyse 24,202 cases of COVID-19 with critical illness comprising a combination of microarray genotype and whole-genome sequencing data from cases of critical illness in the international GenOMICC (11,440 cases) study, combined with other studies recruiting hospitalized patients with a strong focus on severe and critical disease: ISARIC4C (676 cases) and the SCOURGE consortium (5,934 cases). To put these results in the context of existing work, we conduct a meta-analysis of the new GenOMICC genome-wide association study (GWAS) results with previously published data. We find 49 genome-wide significant associations, of which 16 have not been reported previously. To investigate the therapeutic implications of these findings, we infer the structural consequences of protein-coding variants, and combine our GWAS results with gene expression data using a monocyte transcriptome-wide association study (TWAS) model, as well as gene and protein expression using Mendelian randomization. We identify potentially druggable targets in multiple systems, including inflammatory signalling ( JAK1 ), monocyte–macrophage activation and endothelial permeability ( PDE4A ), immunometabolism ( SLC2A5 and AK5 ), and host factors required for viral entry and replication ( TMPRSS2 and RAB2A ). An analysis of 24,202 critical cases of COVID-19 identifies potentially druggable targets in inflammatory signalling ( JAK1 ), monocyte–macrophage activation and endothelial permeability ( PDE4A ), immunometabolism ( SLC2A5 and AK5 ), and host factors required for viral entry and replication ( TMPRSS2 and RAB2A ).

Results of small trials indicate that fluoxetine might improve functional outcomes after stroke. The FOCUS trial aimed to provide a precise estimate of these effects. FOCUS was a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel group, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial done at 103 hospitals in the UK. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years or older, had a clinical stroke diagnosis, were enrolled and randomly assigned between 2 days and 15 days after onset, and had focal neurological deficits. Patients were randomly allocated fluoxetine 20 mg or matching placebo orally once daily for 6 months via a web-based system by use of a minimisation algorithm. The primary outcome was functional status, measured with the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), at 6 months. Patients, carers, health-care staff, and the trial team were masked to treatment allocation. Functional status was assessed at 6 months and 12 months after randomisation. Patients were analysed according to their treatment allocation. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN83290762. Between Sept 10, 2012, and March 31, 2017, 3127 patients were recruited. 1564 patients were allocated fluoxetine and 1563 allocated placebo. mRS data at 6 months were available for 1553 (99·3%) patients in each treatment group. The distribution across mRS categories at 6 months was similar in the fluoxetine and placebo groups (common odds ratio adjusted for minimisation variables 0·951 [95% CI 0·839–1·079]; p=0·439). Patients allocated fluoxetine were less likely than those allocated placebo to develop new depression by 6 months (210 [13·43%] patients vs 269 [17·21%]; difference 3·78% [95% CI 1·26–6·30]; p=0·0033), but they had more bone fractures (45 [2·88%] vs 23 [1·47%]; difference 1·41% [95% CI 0·38–2·43]; p=0·0070). There were no significant differences in any other event at 6 or 12 months. Fluoxetine 20 mg given daily for 6 months after acute stroke does not seem to improve functional outcomes. Although the treatment reduced the occurrence of depression, it increased the frequency of bone fractures. These results do not support the routine use of fluoxetine either for the prevention of post-stroke depression or to promote recovery of function. UK Stroke Association and NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29–146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0– 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25–1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39–1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65–1·60]; p=0·92). These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention. British Heart Foundation.

Cerebral microbleeds are a potential neuroimaging biomarker of cerebral small vessel diseases that are prone to intracranial bleeding. We aimed to determine whether presence of cerebral microbleeds can identify patients at high risk of symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage when anticoagulated for atrial fibrillation after recent ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack. Our observational, multicentre, prospective inception cohort study recruited adults aged 18 years or older from 79 hospitals in the UK and one in the Netherlands with atrial fibrillation and recent acute ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack, treated with a vitamin K antagonist or direct oral anticoagulant, and followed up for 24 months using general practitioner and patient postal questionnaires, telephone interviews, hospital visits, and National Health Service digital data on hospital admissions or death. We excluded patients if they could not undergo MRI, had a definite contraindication to anticoagulation, or had previously received therapeutic anticoagulation. The primary outcome was symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage occurring at any time before the final follow-up at 24 months. The log-rank test was used to compare rates of intracranial haemorrhage between those with and without cerebral microbleeds. We developed two prediction models using Cox regression: first, including all predictors associated with intracranial haemorrhage at the 20% level in univariable analysis; and second, including cerebral microbleed presence and HAS-BLED score. We then compared these with the HAS-BLED score alone. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02513316. Between Aug 4, 2011, and July 31, 2015, we recruited 1490 participants of whom follow-up data were available for 1447 (97%), over a mean period of 850 days (SD 373; 3366 patient-years). The symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage rate in patients with cerebral microbleeds was 9·8 per 1000 patient-years (95% CI 4·0–20·3) compared with 2·6 per 1000 patient-years (95% CI 1·1–5·4) in those without cerebral microbleeds (adjusted hazard ratio 3·67, 95% CI 1·27–10·60). Compared with the HAS-BLED score alone (C-index 0·41, 95% CI 0·29–0·53), models including cerebral microbleeds and HAS-BLED (0·66, 0·53–0·80) and cerebral microbleeds, diabetes, anticoagulant type, and HAS-BLED (0·74, 0·60–0·88) predicted symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage significantly better (difference in C-index 0·25, 95% CI 0·07–0·43, p=0·0065; and 0·33, 0·14–0·51, p=0·00059, respectively). In patients with atrial fibrillation anticoagulated after recent ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack, cerebral microbleed presence is independently associated with symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage risk and could be used to inform anticoagulation decisions. Large-scale collaborative observational cohort analyses are needed to refine and validate intracranial haemorrhage risk scores incorporating cerebral microbleeds to identify patients at risk of net harm from oral anticoagulation. The Stroke Association and the British Heart Foundation.

Oral anticoagulation reduces the rate of systemic embolism for patients with atrial fibrillation by two-thirds, but its benefits for patients with previous intracranial haemorrhage are uncertain. In the Start or STop Anticoagulants Randomised Trial (SoSTART), we aimed to establish whether starting is non-inferior to avoiding oral anticoagulation for survivors of intracranial haemorrhage who have atrial fibrillation. SoSTART was a prospective, randomised, open-label, assessor-masked, parallel-group, pilot phase trial done at 67 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (aged ≥18 years) who had survived at least 24 h after symptomatic spontaneous intracranial haemorrhage, had atrial fibrillation, and had a CHA2DS2-VASc score of at least 2. Web-based computerised randomisation incorporating a minimisation algorithm allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid long-term (≥1 year) full treatment dose open-label oral anticoagulation. The participants assigned to start oral anticoagulation received either a direct oral anticoagulant or vitamin K antagonist, and the group assigned to avoid oral anticoagulation received standard clinical practice (antiplatelet agent or no antithrombotic agent). The primary outcome was recurrent symptomatic spontaneous intracranial haemorrhage, and was adjudicated by an individual masked to treatment allocation. All outcomes were ascertained for at least 1 year after randomisation and assessed in the intention-to-treat population of all randomly assigned participants, using Cox proportional hazards regression adjusted for minimisation covariates. We planned a sample size of 190 participants (one-sided p=0·025, power 90%, allowing for non-adherence) based on a non-inferiority margin of 12% (or adjusted hazard ratio [HR] of 3·2). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03153150) and is complete. Between March 29, 2018, and Feb 27, 2020, consent was obtained at 61 sites for 218 participants, of whom 203 were randomly assigned at a median of 115 days (IQR 49–265) after intracranial haemorrhage onset. 101 were assigned to start and 102 to avoid oral anticoagulation. Participants were followed up for median of 1·2 years (IQR 0·97–1·95; completeness 97·2%). Starting oral anticoagulation was not non-inferior to avoiding oral anticoagulation: eight (8%) of 101 in the start group versus four (4%) of 102 in the avoid group had intracranial haemorrhage recurrences (adjusted HR 2·42 [95% CI 0·72–8·09]; p=0·152). Serious adverse events occurred in 17 (17%) participants in the start group and 15 (15%) in the avoid group. 22 (22%) patients in the start group and 11 (11%) patients in the avoid group died during the study. Whether starting oral anticoagulation was non-inferior to avoiding it for people with atrial fibrillation after intracranial haemorrhage was inconclusive, although rates of recurrent intracranial haemorrhage were lower than expected. In view of weak evidence from analyses of three composite secondary outcomes, the possibility that oral anticoagulation might be superior for preventing symptomatic major vascular events should be investigated in adequately powered randomised trials. British Heart Foundation, Medical Research Council, Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland.

The optimal timing of anticoagulation for patients with acute ischaemic stroke with atrial fibrillation is uncertain. We investigated the efficacy and safety of early compared with delayed initiation of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with acute ischaemic stroke associated with atrial fibrillation. We performed a multicentre, open-label, blinded-endpoint, parallel-group, phase 4, randomised controlled trial at 100 UK hospitals. Adults with atrial fibrillation and a clinical diagnosis of acute ischaemic stroke and whose physician was uncertain of the optimal timing for DOAC initiation were eligible for inclusion in the study. We randomly assigned participants (1:1) to early (ie, ≤4 days from stroke symptom onset) or delayed (ie, 7–14 days) anticoagulation initiation with any DOAC, using an independent online randomisation service with random permuted blocks and varying block length, stratified by stroke severity at randomisation. Participants and treating clinicians were not masked to treatment assignment, but all outcomes were adjudicated by a masked independent external adjudication committee using all available clinical records, brain imaging reports, and source images. The primary outcome was a composite of recurrent ischaemic stroke, symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage, unclassifiable stroke, or systemic embolism incidence at 90 days in a modified intention-to-treat population. We used a gatekeeper approach by sequentially testing for a non-inferiority margin of 2 percentage points, followed by testing for superiority. OPTIMAS is registered with ISRCTN (ISRCTN17896007) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03759938), and the trial is ongoing. Between July 5, 2019, and Jan 31, 2024, 3648 patients were randomly assigned to early or delayed DOAC initiation. 27 participants did not fulfil the eligibility criteria or withdrew consent to include their data, leaving 3621 patients (1814 in the early group and 1807 in the delayed group; 1981 men and 1640 women) in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. The primary outcome occurred in 59 (3·3%) of 1814 participants in the early DOAC initiation group compared with 59 (3·3%) of 1807 participants in the delayed DOAC initiation group (adjusted risk difference [RD] 0·000, 95% CI –0·011 to 0·012). The upper limit of the 95% CI for the adjusted RD was less than the non-inferiority margin of 2 percentage points (pnon-inferiority=0·0003). Superiority was not identified (psuperiority=0·96). Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage occurred in 11 (0·6%) participants allocated to the early DOAC initiation group compared with 12 (0·7%) participants allocated to the delayed DOAC initiation group (adjusted RD 0·001, –0·004 to 0·006; p=0·78). Early DOAC initiation within 4 days after ischaemic stroke associated with atrial fibrillation was non-inferior to delayed initiation for the composite outcome of ischaemic stroke, intracranial haemorrhage, unclassifiable stroke, or systemic embolism at 90 days. Our findings do not support the current common and guideline-supported practice of delaying DOAC initiation after ischaemic stroke with atrial fibrillation. British Heart Foundation.

Findings from the RESTART trial suggest that starting antiplatelet therapy might reduce the risk of recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage compared with avoiding antiplatelet therapy. Brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases (such as cerebral microbleeds) are associated with greater risks of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage. We did subgroup analyses of the RESTART trial to explore whether these brain imaging features modify the effects of antiplatelet therapy. RESTART was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK that assessed whether starting antiplatelet therapy might reduce the risk of recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage compared with avoiding antiplatelet therapy. For this prespecified subgroup analysis, consultant neuroradiologists masked to treatment allocation reviewed brain CT or MRI scans performed before randomisation to confirm participant eligibility and rate features of the intracerebral haemorrhage and surrounding brain. We followed participants for primary (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) and secondary (ischaemic stroke) outcomes for up to 5 years (reported elsewhere). For this report, we analysed eligible participants with intracerebral haemorrhage according to their treatment allocation in primary subgroup analyses of cerebral microbleeds on MRI and in exploratory subgroup analyses of other features on CT or MRI. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN71907627. Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were enrolled, of whom 525 (98%) had intracerebral haemorrhage: 507 (97%) were diagnosed on CT (252 assigned to start antiplatelet therapy and 255 assigned to avoid antiplatelet therapy, of whom one withdrew and was not analysed) and 254 (48%) underwent the required brain MRI protocol (122 in the start antiplatelet therapy group and 132 in the avoid antiplatelet therapy group). There were no clinically or statistically significant hazards of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage in primary subgroup analyses of cerebral microbleed presence (2 or more) versus absence (0 or 1) (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·30 [95% CI 0·08–1·13] vs 0·77 [0·13–4·61]; pinteraction=0·41), cerebral microbleed number 0–1 versus 2–4 versus 5 or more (HR 0·77 [0·13–4·62] vs 0·32 [0·03–3·66] vs 0·33 [0·07–1·60]; pinteraction=0·75), or cerebral microbleed strictly lobar versus other location (HR 0·52 [0·004–6·79] vs 0·37 [0·09–1·28]; pinteraction=0·85). There was no evidence of heterogeneity in the effects of antiplatelet therapy in any exploratory subgroup analyses (all pinteraction>0·05). Our findings exclude all but a very modest harmful effect of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage in the presence of cerebral microbleeds. Further randomised trials are needed to replicate these findings and investigate them with greater precision. British Heart Foundation.

Introduction Postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing major emergency gastrointestinal surgery are a major burden on healthcare systems. Optimal management of perioperative intravenous fluids may reduce mortality rates and improve outcomes from surgery. Previous small trials of cardiac-output guided haemodynamic therapy algorithms in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery have suggested this intervention results in reduced complications and a modest reduction in mortality. However, this existing evidence is based mainly on elective (planned) surgery, with little evaluation in the emergency setting. There are fundamental clinical and pathophysiological differences between the planned and emergency surgical setting which may influence the effects of this intervention. A large definitive trial in emergency surgery is needed to confirm or refute the potential benefits observed in elective surgery and to inform widespread clinical practice. Methods The FLO-ELA trial is a multi-centre, parallel-group, open, randomised controlled trial. 3138 patients aged 50 and over undergoing major emergency gastrointestinal surgery will be randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio using minimisation to minimally invasive cardiac output monitoring to guide protocolised administration of intra-venous fluid, or usual care without cardiac output monitoring. The trial intervention will be carried out during surgery and for up to 6 h postoperatively. The trial is funded through an efficient design call by the National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Technology Assessment (NIHR HTA) programme and uses existing routinely collected datasets for the majority of data collection. The primary outcome is the number of days alive and out of hospital within 90 days of randomisation. Participants and those delivering the intervention will not be blinded to treatment allocation. Participant recruitment started in September 2017 with a 1-year internal pilot phase and is ongoing at the time of publication. Discussion This will be the largest contemporary randomised trial examining the effectiveness of perioperative cardiac output-guided haemodynamic therapy in patients undergoing major emergency gastrointestinal surgery. The multi-centre design and broad inclusion criteria support the external validity of the trial. Although the clinical teams delivering the trial interventions will not be blinded, significant trial outcome measures are objective and not subject to detection bias. Trial registration ISRCTN 14729158. Registered on 02 May 2017.