<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>20(7)</volume><submitter>Mohzari YA</submitter><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of tocilizumab in mechanically ventilated patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).&lt;h4>Research design and methods&lt;/h4>This retrospective multicenter study included adults (≥18 years) diagnosed with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from nasopharyngeal swab, and requiring invasive mechanical ventilation during admission. Survival analyses with inverse propensity score treatment weighting (IPTW) and propensity score matching (PSM) were conducted. To account for immortal bias, we used Cox proportional modeling with time-dependent covariance. Competing risk analysis was performed for the extubation endpoint.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>A total of 556 (tocilizumab = 193, control = 363) patients were included. Males constituted the majority of the participants (69.2% in tocilizumab arm,74.1% in control arm). Tocilizumab was not associated with a reduction in mortality with hazard ratio [(HR) = 0.82,95% confidence interval (95%CI): 0.62-1.10] in the Inverse propensity score weighting (IPTW) analysis and (HR = 0.86,95% CI: 0.64-1.16) in the PSM analysis. However, tocilizumab was associated with an increased rate of extubation (33.6%) compared to the control arm (11.9%); subdistributional hazards (SHR) = 3.1, 95% CI: 1.86-5.16).&lt;h4>Conclusions&lt;/h4>Although tocilizumab was not found to be effective in reducing mortality, extubation rate while on mechanical ventilation was higher among tocilizumab treated group.</pubmed_abstract><journal>Expert review of anti-infective therapy</journal><pagination>1037-1047</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC8935451</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><pubmed_title>Tocilizumab effectiveness in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients (T-MVC-19 Study): a multicenter real-world evidence.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC8935451</pmcid><pubmed_authors>Alghalbi M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Alamer AA</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Alamer A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Alsowaida YS</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>AlMusawa MI</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Alharbi RY</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Abraham I</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Alattas M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Asdaq SMB</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Albujaidy A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Alajmi GS</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Damfu NY</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Mathew M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Mohzari YA</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Alajlan SA</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Faqihi AY</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Alajami HN</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Khuwaja M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Alomar M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Aljefri D</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Alkhaldi TK</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Alhassan BM</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Alrashed AA</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Bamogaddam RF</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Alharthi AH</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Almulhim AS</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Alshehab NA</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Alrumayyan BF</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Alshareef A</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Tocilizumab effectiveness in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients (T-MVC-19 Study): a multicenter real-world evidence.</name><description>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of tocilizumab in mechanically ventilated patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).&lt;h4>Research design and methods&lt;/h4>This retrospective multicenter study included adults (≥18 years) diagnosed with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from nasopharyngeal swab, and requiring invasive mechanical ventilation during admission. Survival analyses with inverse propensity score treatment weighting (IPTW) and propensity score matching (PSM) were conducted. To account for immortal bias, we used Cox proportional modeling with time-dependent covariance. Competing risk analysis was performed for the extubation endpoint.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>A total of 556 (tocilizumab = 193, control = 363) patients were included. Males constituted the majority of the participants (69.2% in tocilizumab arm,74.1% in control arm). Tocilizumab was not associated with a reduction in mortality with hazard ratio [(HR) = 0.82,95% confidence interval (95%CI): 0.62-1.10] in the Inverse propensity score weighting (IPTW) analysis and (HR = 0.86,95% CI: 0.64-1.16) in the PSM analysis. However, tocilizumab was associated with an increased rate of extubation (33.6%) compared to the control arm (11.9%); subdistributional hazards (SHR) = 3.1, 95% CI: 1.86-5.16).&lt;h4>Conclusions&lt;/h4>Although tocilizumab was not found to be effective in reducing mortality, extubation rate while on mechanical ventilation was higher among tocilizumab treated group.</description><dates><release>2022-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2022 Jul</publication><modification>2026-06-04T17:06:41.814Z</modification><creation>2025-04-05T13:24:23.38Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC8935451</accession><cross_references><pubmed>35209783</pubmed><doi>10.1080/14787210.2022.2046462</doi></cross_references></HashMap>