Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 970

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Interleukin-1 blockade with high-dose anakinra in patients with COVID-19, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and hyperinflammation: a retrospective cohort study

Open access
Cavalli, Giulio, De Luca, Giacomo, Campochiaro, Corrado, Della-Torre, Emanuel, Ripa, Marco, Canetti, Diana, Oltolini, Chiara, Castiglioni, Barbara, Tassan Din, Chiara, Boffini, Nicola, Tomelleri, Alessandro, Farina, Nicola, Ruggeri, Annalisa, Rovere-Querini, Patrizia, Di Lucca, Giuseppe, Martinenghi, Sabina, Scotti, Raffaella, Tresoldi, Moreno, Ciceri, Fabio, Landoni, Giovanni, Zangrillo, Alberto, Scarpellini, Paolo, Dagna, Lorenzo·2020·The Lancet Rheumatology

Abstract

Summary Background Mortality of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and systemic inflammation is high. In areas of pandemic outbreak, the number of patients can exceed maximum capacity of intensive care units (ICUs), and, thus, these individuals often receive non-invasive ventilation outside of the ICU. Effective treatments for this population are needed urgently. Anakinra is a recombinant interleukin-1 receptor antagonist that might be beneficial in this patient population. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study at the San Raffaele Hospital in Milan, Italy. We included consecutive patients (aged ≥18 years) with COVID-19, moderate-to-severe ARDS, and hyperinflammation (defined as serum C-reactive protein ≥100 mg/L, ferritin ≥900 ng/mL, or both) who were managed with non-invasive ventilation outside of the ICU and who received standard treatment of 200 mg hydroxychloroquine twice a day orally and 400 mg lopinavir with 100 mg ritonavir twice a day orally. We compared survival, mechanical ventilation-free survival, changes in C-reactive protein, respiratory function, and clinical status in a cohort of patients who received additional treatment with anakinra (either 5 mg/kg twice a day intravenously [high dose] or 100 mg twice a day subcutaneously [low dose]) with a retrospective cohort of patients who did not receive anakinra (referred to as the standard treatment group). All outcomes were assessed at 21 days. This study is part of the COVID-19 Biobank study, which is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04318366. Findings Between March 17 and March 27, 2020, 29 patients received high-dose intravenous anakinra, non-invasive ventilation, and standard treatment. Between March 10 and March 17, 2020, 16 patients received non-invasive ventilation and standard treatment only and comprised the comparison group for this study. A further seven patients received low-dose subcutaneous anakinra in addition to non-invasive ventilation and standard treatment; however, anakinra treatment was interrupted after 7 days because of a paucity of effects on serum C-reactive protein and clinical status. At 21 days, treatment with high-dose anakinra was associated with reductions in serum C-reactive protein and progressive improvements in respiratory function in 21 (72%) of 29 patients; five (17%) patients were on mechanical ventilation and three (10%) died. In the standard treatment group, eight (50%) of 16 patients showed respiratory improvement at 21 days; one (6%) patient was on mechanical ventilation and seven (44%) died. At 21 days, survival was 90% in the high-dose anakinra group and 56% in the standard treatment group (p=0·009). Mechanical ventilation-free survival was 72% in the anakinra group versus 50% in the standard treatment group (p=0·15). Bacteraemia occurred in four (14%) of 29 patients receiving high-dose anakinra and two (13%) of 16 patients receiving standard treatment. Discontinuation of anakinra was not followed by inflammatory relapses. Interpretation In this retrospective cohort study of patients with COVID-19 and ARDS managed with non-invasive ventilation outside of the ICU, treatment with high-dose anakinra was safe and associated with clinical improvement in 72% of patients. Confirmation of efficacy will require controlled trials. Funding None.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s2665-9913(20)30127-2

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 14 references

Cited by

See all 970

Metadata

Authors
Cavalli, G., De Luca, G., Campochiaro, C., Della-Torre, E., Ripa, M., Canetti, D., Oltolini, C., Castiglioni, B., Tassan Din, C., Boffini, N., Tomelleri, A., Farina, N., Ruggeri, A., Rovere-Querini, P., Di Lucca, G., Martinenghi, S., Scotti, R., Tresoldi, M., Ciceri, F., Landoni, G., Zangrillo, A., Scarpellini, P., & Dagna, L.
Venue
The Lancet Rheumatology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-06
Volume
2
Issue
6
Pages
e325-e331
ISSN
2665-9913 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3023088605
Cited by
970
References
14
FWCI
26.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Interleukin-1 blockade with high-dose anakinra in patients with COVID-19, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and hyperinflammation: a retrospective cohort study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s2665-9913(20)30127-2
The paper
Cavalli, G., De Luca, G., Campochiaro, C., Della-Torre, E., Ripa, M., Canetti, D., Oltolini, C., Castiglioni, B., Tassan Din, C., Boffini, N., Tomelleri, A., Farina, N., Ruggeri, A., Rovere-Querini, P., Di Lucca, G., Martinenghi, S., Scotti, R., Tresoldi, M., Ciceri, F., . . . Dagna, L. (2020). Interleukin-1 blockade with high-dose anakinra in patients with COVID-19, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and hyperinflammation: a retrospective cohort study. The Lancet Rheumatology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2665-9913(20)30127-2

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.