Immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) is a rare complication associated with vaccines targeting various diseases, including influenza, measles‐mumps‐rubella, hepatitis B, and diphtheria‐tetanus‐pertussis. We report 2 cases of ITP in healthy 20‐year‐old and 21‐year‐old women presenting to Emory University in Atlanta, GA, 2 days after the second dose and 11 days after the first dose (respectively) of the Pfizer‐BioNTech messenger RNA severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccine. Both patients recovered quickly. With more than a billion doses of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines safely administered worldwide as of May 2021, discussions with patients should put into perspective the low risks of vaccination against the enormous societal benefit of the coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine.

Sepsis remains a leading cause of death in hospitals (1). In the presence of timely antibiotics, infection source control, and performance improvement projects, most ancillary therapies for sepsis have not demonstrated benefits in clinical trials (2). Thiamine, also known as vitamin B1, has been investigated for the treatment of sepsis and septic shock, as thiamine deficiency has been reported in patients with sepsis (3). Many clinicians are familiar with the use of thiamine to correct low concentrations in patients with alcohol use disorder, and it has previously been studied in sepsis in conjunction with vitamin C and hydrocortisone (4, 5).

The IMPACC cohort, composed of >1,000 hospitalized COVID-19 participants, contains five illness trajectory groups (TGs) during acute infection (first 28 days), ranging from milder (TG1–3) to more severe disease course (TG4) and death (TG5). Here, we report deep immunophenotyping, profiling of >15,000 longitudinal blood and nasal samples from 540 participants of the IMPACC cohort, using 14 distinct assays. These unbiased analyses identify cellular and molecular signatures present within 72 h of hospital admission that distinguish moderate from severe and fatal COVID-19 disease. Importantly, cellular and molecular states also distinguish participants with more severe disease that recover or stabilize within 28 days from those that progress to fatal outcomes (TG4 vs. TG5). Furthermore, our longitudinal design reveals that these biologic states display distinct temporal patterns associated with clinical outcomes. Characterizing host immune responses in relation to heterogeneity in disease course may inform clinical prognosis and opportunities for intervention.

Introduction Sepsis is associated with a dysregulated host response to infection and impaired endogenous corticosteroid metabolism. As such, therapeutic use of exogenous corticosteroids is a promising adjunctive intervention. Despite a large number of trials examining this research question, uncertainty persists regarding the effect of corticosteroids on survival in sepsis. Several large randomised controlled trials have been published recently prompting a re-evaluation of the available literature. Methods and analysis A rigorous and reproducible search and screening process from a Cochrane review on the same topic was comprehensive to October 2014. We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, the Cochrane trial registry and clinicaltrials.gov for eligible randomised controlled trials investigating the use of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis from September 2014. Outcomes have been chosen by a semi-independent guideline panel, created in the context of a parallel BMJ Rapid Recommendation on the topic. This panel includes clinicians, content experts, methodologists and patient representatives, who will help identify patient-important outcomes that are critical for deciding whether to use or not use corticosteroids in sepsis. Two reviewers will independently screen and identify eligible studies; a third reviewer will resolve any disagreements. We will use RevMan to pool effect estimates from included studies for each outcome using a random-effect model. We will present the results as relative risk with 95% CI for dichotomous outcomes and as mean difference or standardised mean difference for continuous outcomes with 95% CI. We will assess the certainty of evidence at the outcome level using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. We will conduct a priori subgroup analyses, which have been chosen by the parallel BMJ Rapid Recommendation panel. Ethics and dissemination The aim of this systematic review is to summarise the updated evidence on the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis. Trial registration number CRD42017058537.

Objective: This report describes three patients with Ebola virus disease who were treated in the United States and developed for severe critical illness and multiple organ failure secondary to Ebola virus infection. The patients received mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy, invasive monitoring, vasopressor support, and investigational therapies for Ebola virus disease. Data Sources: Patient medical records from three tertiary care centers (Emory University Hospital, University of Nebraska Medical Center, and Texas Health Presbyterian Dallas Hospital). Study Selection: Not applicable. Data Extraction: Not applicable. Data Synthesis: Not applicable. Conclusion: In the severe form, patients with Ebola virus disease may require life-sustaining therapy, including mechanical ventilation and renal replacement therapy. In conjunction with other reported cases, this series suggests that respiratory and renal failure may occur in severe Ebola virus disease, especially in patients burdened with high viral loads. Ebola virus disease complicated by multiple organ failure can be survivable with the application of advanced life support measures. This collective, multicenter experience is presented with the hope that it may inform future treatment of patients with Ebola virus disease requiring critical care treatment.

Objective: Clinical protocols may decrease unnecessary variation in care and improve compliance with desirable therapies. We evaluated whether highly protocolized ICUs have superior patient outcomes compared with less highly protocolized ICUs. Design: Observational study in which participating ICUs completed a general assessment and enrolled new patients 1 day each week. Patients: A total of 6,179 critically ill patients. Setting: Fifty-nine ICUs in the United States Critical Illness and Injury Trials Group Critical Illness Outcomes Study. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: The primary exposure was the number of ICU protocols; the primary outcome was hospital mortality. A total of 5,809 participants were followed prospectively, and 5,454 patients in 57 ICUs had complete outcome data. The median number of protocols per ICU was 19 (interquartile range, 15-21.5). In single-variable analyses, there were no differences in ICU and hospital mortality, length of stay, use of mechanical ventilation, vasopressors, or continuous sedation among individuals in ICUs with a high versus low number of protocols. The lack of association was confirmed in adjusted multivariable analysis (p = 0.70). Protocol compliance with two ventilator management protocols was moderate and did not differ between ICUs with high versus low numbers of protocols for lung protective ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome (47% vs 52%; p = 0.28) and for spontaneous breathing trials (55% vs 51%; p = 0.27). Conclusions: Clinical protocols are highly prevalent in U.S. ICUs. The presence of a greater number of protocols was not associated with protocol compliance or patient mortality.

Objectives: To develop hypotheses of patient and surrogate’s rationale for decision-making. Design: We pursued a qualitative study of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome or sepsis and their surrogates. Fourteen patients and 28 surrogates were given semistructured interviews while in the ICU and again 30 days later. The interviews focused on goal outcomes for the ICU stay and why a patient or surrogate would want a specific intervention (e.g., intubation and cardiopulmonary resuscitation). Setting: ICU of tertiary care academic hospital. Patients: Fourteen acute respiratory distress syndrome or sepsis patients and 28 of their surrogates. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Interviews were analyzed using grounded theory and the constant comparative method on NVivo 10.0 (QSR International, Melbourne, Australia). We identified the following four typologies of decision-making rationale: 1) “Timers”—determined decisions based on the length of time on life support; 2) “Natural Livers”—rejected interventions using a “machine”; 3) “Deferrers”—relied on physician for decision-making and prognosis; and 4) “Believers”—relied on a higher power for guidance. Conclusions: Our hypothesized typologies need validation in a prospective observational trial. If validated, they may allow for better clinician communication.

Sepsis is life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection [1]. Sepsis and septic shock are major healthcare problems, impacting millions of people around the world each year and killing between one in three and one in six of those it affects [2–4].1 Early identification and appropriate management in the initial hours after the development of sepsis improve outcomes. The recommendations in this document are intended to provide guidance for the clinician caring for adult patients with sepsis or septic shock in the hospital setting. Recommendations from these guidelines cannot replace the clinician’s decision-making capability when presented with a unique patient’s clinical variables. These guidelines are intended to reflect best practice.

Background: Sepsis accounts for 30% to 50% of all in-hospital deaths in the United States. Other than antibiotics and source control, management strategies are largely supportive with fluid resuscitation and respiratory, renal, and circulatory support. Intravenous vitamin C in conjunction with thiamine and hydrocortisone has recently been suggested to improve outcomes in patients with sepsis in a single-center before-and-after study. However, before this therapeutic strategy is adopted, a rigorous assessment of its efficacy is needed. Methods: The Vitamin C, Thiamine and Steroids in Sepsis (VICTAS) trial is a prospective, multi-center, double-blind, adaptive sample size, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. It will enroll patients with sepsis causing respiratory or circulatory compromise or both. Patients will be randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous vitamin C (1.5 g), thiamine (100 mg), and hydrocortisone (50 mg) every 6 h or matching placebos until a total of 16 administrations have been completed or intensive care unit discharge occurs (whichever is first). Patients randomly assigned to the comparator group are permitted to receive open-label stress-dose steroids at the discretion of the treating clinical team. The primary outcome is consecutive days free of ventilator and vasopressor support (VVFDs) in the 30 days following randomization. The key secondary outcome is mortality at 30 days. Sample size will be determined adaptively by using interim analyses with pre-stated stopping rules to allow the early recognition of a large mortality benefit if one exists and to refocus on the more sensitive outcome of VVFDs if an early large mortality benefit is not observed. Discussion: VICTAS is a large, multi-center, double-blind, adaptive sample size, randomized, placebo-controlled trial that will test the efficacy of vitamin C, thiamine, and hydrocortisone as a combined therapy in patients with respiratory or circulatory dysfunction (or both) resulting from sepsis. Because the components of this therapy are inexpensive and readily available and have very favorable risk profiles, demonstrated efficacy would have immediate implications for the management of sepsis worldwide.