PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Ramakrishnan, Sanjay AU - Nicolau, Dan V. AU - Langford, Beverly AU - Mahdi, Mahdi AU - Jeffers, Helen AU - Mwasuku, Christine AU - Krassowska, Karolina AU - Fox, Robin AU - Binnian, Ian AU - Glover, Victoria AU - Bright, Stephen AU - Butler, Christopher AU - Cane, Jennifer L AU - Halner, Andreas AU - Matthews, Philippa C AU - Donnelly, Louise E AU - Simpson, Jodie L AU - Baker, Jonathan R AU - Fadai, Nabil T AU - Peterson, Stefan AU - Bengtsson, Thomas AU - Barnes, Peter J AU - Russell, Richard EK AU - Bafadhel, Mona TI - Inhaled budesonide in the treatment of early COVID-19 illness: a randomised controlled trial AID - 10.1101/2021.02.04.21251134 DP - 2021 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2021.02.04.21251134 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/02/08/2021.02.04.21251134.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/02/08/2021.02.04.21251134.full AB - Background Multiple early hospital cohorts of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) showed that patients with chronic respiratory disease were significantly under-represented. We hypothesised that the widespread use of inhaled glucocorticoids was responsible for this finding and tested if inhaled glucorticoids would be an effective treatment for early COVID-19 illness.Methods We conducted a randomised, open label trial of inhaled budesonide, compared to usual care, in adults within 7 days of the onset of mild Covid-19 symptoms. The primary end point was COVID-19-related urgent care visit, emergency department assessment or hospitalisation. The trial was stopped early after independent statistical review concluded that study outcome would not change with further participant enrolment.Results 146 patients underwent randomisation. For the per protocol population (n=139), the primary outcome occurred in 10 participants and 1 participant in the usual care and budesonide arms respectively (difference in proportion 0.131, p=0.004). The number needed to treat with inhaled budesonide to reduce COVID-19 deterioration was 8. Clinical recovery was 1 day shorter in the budesonide arm compared to the usual care arm (median of 7 days versus 8 days respectively, logrank test p=0.007). Proportion of days with a fever and proportion of participants with at least 1 day of fever was lower in the budesonide arm. Fewer participants randomised to budesonide had persistent symptoms at day 14 and day 28 compared to participants receiving usual care.Conclusion Early administration of inhaled budesonide reduced the likelihood of needing urgent medical care and reduced time to recovery following early COVID-19 infection.(Funded by Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre and AstraZeneca; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04416399)Evidence before this study The majority of interventions studied for the COVID-19 pandemic are focused on hospitalised patients. Widely available and broadly relevant interventions for mild COVID-19 are urgently needed.Added value of this study In this open label randomised controlled trial, inhaled budesonide, when given to adults with early COVID-19 illness, reduces the likelihood of requiring urgent care, emergency department consultation or hospitalisation. There was also a quicker resolution of fever, a known poor prognostic marker in COVID-19 and a faster self-reported and questionnaire reported symptom resolution. There were fewer participants with persistent COVID-19 symptoms at 14 and 28 days after budesonide therapy compared to usual care.Implications of all the available evidence The STOIC trial potentially provides the first easily accessible effective intervention in early COVID-19. By assessing health care resource utilisation, the study provides an exciting option to help with the worldwide pressure on health care systems due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Data from this study also suggests a potentially effective treatment to prevent the long term morbidity from persistent COVID-19 symptoms.Competing Interest StatementDr. Ramakrishnan reports grants and non-financial support from Oxford Respiratory NIHR BRC, during the conduct of the study; non-financial support from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Australian Government Research Training Program, outside the submitted work; . Dr. Nicolau has nothing to disclose. Mrs Langford has nothing to disclose. Mr. Mahdi has nothing to disclose. Mrs Helen Jeffers reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work; . Miss Mwasuku has nothing to disclose. Mrs Krassowska has nothing to disclose. Dr Fox has nothing to disclose. Dr Binnian has nothing to disclose. Dr Glover has nothing to disclose. Dr Bright has nothing to disclose. Dr. Butler reports grants from National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Roche Molecular Diagnostics, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, and various public funding bodies for research related to diagnostics and infections. He has revcied personal fees from Pfizer INC, Roche Diagnostics, and Janssen Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. Dr. Cane has nothing to disclose. Mr. Halner has nothing to disclose. Dr. Matthews has nothing to disclose. Dr. Donnelly reports grants from AstraZeneca, from Boehringer-Ingelheim, outside the submitted work; . Dr. Simpson has nothing to disclose. Dr Baker has nothing to disclose. Dr. Fadai has nothing to disclose. Dr. Peterson reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work; . Mr. Bengtsson reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work; Dr. Barnes reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Teva, personal fees from Covis, during the conduct of the study; . Dr. Russell reports grants from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Chiesi UK, personal fees from Glaxo-SmithKline, during the conduct of the study; . Dr. Bafadhel reports grants from AstraZeneca, personal fees from AstraZeneca, Chiesi, GSK, other from Albus Health, ProAxsis, outside the submitted workClinical TrialNCT04416399Funding StatementThe study was funded by the Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre and AstraZeneca (Gothenburg, Sweden). The funders had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis and decision to publish. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The trial was sponsored by the University of Oxford, and was approved by the Fulham London Research Ethics Committee (20/HRA/2531) and the National Health Research AuthorityAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesDe-identified individual participant data and a data dictionary defining each field in the set, can be made available to others upon approval of a written request to the corresponding author. The request will be evaluated by a committee formed by a subset of co-authors to determine the research value. A data sharing agreement will be needed.