Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Response to ‘Neither earlier not late tocilizumab improved outcomes in the intensive care unit patients with COVID-19 in a retrospective cohort study’ by Moiseev et al
  1. Sofia Ramiro1,2,
  2. Robert B M Landewé1,3,
  3. Rémy Mostard4
  1. 1 Department of Rheumatology, Zuyderland Medical Centre Heerlen, Heerlen, Limburg, The Netherlands
  2. 2 Department of Rheumatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands
  3. 3 Department of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, Amsterdam Rheumatology Center, AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  4. 4 Department of Pulmonology, Zuyderland Medical Center, Heerlen, The Netherlands
  1. Correspondence to Dr Sofia Ramiro, Rheumatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Zuid-Holland, Netherlands; sofiaramiro{at}gmail.com

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

We read with interest the letter from Moiseev et al 1 on our COVID High-intensity Immunosuppression in Cytokine storm syndrome study.2 In our study, we have used an immunosuppressive strategy composed by glucocorticoids in the first line, followed, in case of insufficient response, by tocilizumab in patients with COVID-19-associated cytokine storm syndrome (CSS). Moiseev et al share with us the results of their study in which they have treated patients with COVID-19 with tocilizumab. In a retrospective study, the authors compared the outcomes of patients treated with tocilizumab with those of patients not treated with it. Patients could receive tocilizumab in the presence of bilateral pneumonia involving at least 50% of lung tissue and requiring …

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Handling editor Josef S Smolen

  • Contributors SR drafted the response. All authors reviewed and approved the final response.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting or dissemination plans of this research.

  • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Linked Articles