Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 51
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
Obstet Gynecol ; 138(4): 574-577, 2021 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1462516

ABSTRACT

Since the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, health care professionals have made swift accommodations to provide consistent and safe care, including emphasizing remote access to allow physical distancing. Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate intramuscular injection (DMPA-IM) prescription is typically administered by a health care professional, whereas DMPA-subcutaneous has the potential to be safely self-injected by patients, avoiding contact with a health care professional. However, DMPA-subcutaneous is rarely prescribed despite its U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval in 2004 and widespread coverage by both state Medicaid providers and many private insurers. Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate users are disproportionately non-White, and thus the restriction in DMPA-subcutaneous prescribing may both stem from and contribute to systemic racial health disparities. We review evidence on acceptability, safety, and continuation rates of DMPA-subcutaneous, consider sources of implicit bias that may impede prescription of this contraceptive method, and provide recommendations for implementing DMPA-subcutaneous prescribing.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Contraceptive Agents, Female/administration & dosage , Family Planning Services/statistics & numerical data , Medroxyprogesterone Acetate/administration & dosage , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Contraception/statistics & numerical data , Drug Prescriptions/statistics & numerical data , Family Planning Services/methods , Female , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Healthcare Disparities/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Injections, Subcutaneous , SARS-CoV-2 , Self Administration , United States
2.
Vet Surg ; 50(2): 410-417, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1455661

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To describe the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of meperidine after IM and subcutaneous administration in horses. STUDY DESIGN: prospective, randomized, blinded, crossover trial. ANIMALS: Six adult horses weighing 494 ± 33 kg. METHODS: Treatments included meperidine 1 mg/kg IM with saline 6 mL subcutaneously, meperidine 1 mg/kg subcutaneously with saline 6 mL IM, and saline 6 mL subcutaneously and 6 mL IM, with a 7-day washout between treatments. Plasma meperidine concentrations and pharmacodynamic values (thermal and mechanical thresholds, physiological variables, fecal production) were collected at various time points for 24 hours. Accelerometry data were obtained for 8 hours to measure locomotor activity. Data were analyzed with a mixed effects model, and α was set at .05. RESULTS: Meperidine terminal half-life (T1/2 ), maximal plasma concentrations, and time to maximal concentration were 186 ± 59 and 164 ± 56 minutes, 265.7 ± 47.2 and 243.1 ± 80.1 ng/mL at 17 ± 6, and 24 ± 13 minutes for IM at subcutaneous administration, respectively. No effect of treatment or time was observed on thermal or mechanical thresholds, heart rate, respiratory rate, locomotor activity, frequency of defecations, or fecal weight (P > .2 for all). CONCLUSION: Maximum meperidine concentrations were achieved quickly with a short T1/2 in both treatment groups. Neither IM nor subcutaneous meperidine influenced thermal or mechanical threshold or physiological variables. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The short half-life and lack of detectable antinociceptive effect do not support IM or subcutaneous administration meperidine at 1 mg/kg for analgesia in horses.


Subject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid/pharmacology , Horses/metabolism , Meperidine/pharmacology , Analgesics, Opioid/pharmacokinetics , Animals , Female , Injections, Intramuscular/veterinary , Injections, Subcutaneous/veterinary , Male , Meperidine/pharmacokinetics
3.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 6: CD008077, 2021 06 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1453524

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Heparin is an anticoagulant medication that is usually injected subcutaneously. Subcutaneous administration of heparin may result in complications such as bruising, haematoma, and pain at the injection site. One of the factors that may affect pain, haematoma, and bruising is injection speed. Several studies have been carried out to determine if speed of injection affects the amount of pain and bruising where the injection is given; however, the results of these studies have differed, and study authors have not reached a clear final conclusion. This is the second update of a review first published in 2014. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of duration (speed) of subcutaneous heparin injection on pain and bruising at the injection site in people admitted to hospitals or clinics who require treatment with unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). We also looked at haematoma at the injection site. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 22 June 2020. We undertook reference checking of included studies to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of different durations of subcutaneous injection of heparin on pain, bruising, and haematoma at the injection site. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: For this update, two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data via Covidence software and assessed methodological quality using Cochrane's risk of bias tool. The primary outcomes of interest were pain intensity at injection site and size and incidence of bruising. The secondary outcomes of interest were size and incidence of haematoma at injection site. We calculated the odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD), or standardised mean difference (SMD) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We identified one new study for this update, resulting in a total of five included studies with 503 participants who received subcutaneous injections of LMWH into the abdomen. Given the nature of the intervention, it was not possible to blind participants and caregivers (personnel) in any of the included studies. Two studies described blinding of outcome assessors. Overall, the methodological quality of included studies was moderate. The duration of the fast injection was 10 seconds, and the duration of the slow injection was 30 seconds in all included studies. Four studies reported site pain intensity after each injection at different time points. Two studies assessed site pain intensity immediately after each injection; meta-analysis showed no evidence of a difference in site pain intensity immediately after slow injection when compared to fast injection (MD -1.52, 95% CI -3.56 to 0.53; 140 participants; low-certainty evidence). Meta-analysis of three studies indicated that site pain intensity may be slightly reduced 48 hours after the slow heparin injection compared to fast injection (MD -1.60, 95% CI -2.69 to -0.51; 103 participants; low-certainty evidence). Five studies assessed bruise size at 48 hours, and two studies assessed bruise size at 60 hours. Meta-analysis showed there may be a reduction in bruise size 48 hours (SMD -0.54, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.02; 503 participants; 5 studies; very low-certainty evidence) and 60 hours (SMD -0.49, 95% CI -0.93 to -0.06; 84 participants; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence) after slow injection compared to fast injection. There was no evidence of a difference in bruise size 72 hours after slow injection compared to fast injection (SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.06; 140 participants; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). Three studies evaluated incidence of bruising and showed there may be a reduction in bruise incidence 48 hours (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.60; 444 participants; low-certainty evidence) and 60 hours (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.65; 84 participants; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence) after slow injection compared to fast injection. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence due to risk of bias concerns, imprecision, and inconsistency. None of the included studies measured size or incidence of haematoma. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Administering medication safely and enhancing patient comfort are the main aims of clinical nurses. In this review, we identified five RCTs that evaluated the effect of subcutaneous heparin injection duration on pain intensity, bruise size and incidence. We found that pain may be slightly reduced 48 hours after slow injection. Similarly, there may be a reduction in bruise size and incidence after slow injection compared to fast injection 48 and 60 hours postinjection. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for all outcomes to low or very low due to risk of bias concerns, imprecision, and inconsistency. Accordingly, new trials with a more robust design, more participants, and a focus on different injection speeds will be useful in strengthening the certainty of the available evidence.


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , Contusions/prevention & control , Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight/administration & dosage , Injections, Subcutaneous/methods , Pain, Procedural/prevention & control , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Bias , Contusions/chemically induced , Contusions/pathology , Hematoma/chemically induced , Hematoma/pathology , Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight/adverse effects , Humans , Injections, Subcutaneous/adverse effects , Middle Aged , Pain Measurement/methods , Pain, Procedural/etiology , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Time Factors
4.
Inflamm Res ; 70(10-12): 1233-1246, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1442067

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE AND DESIGN: The aim of this double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III CORONA clinical trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IL-6 receptor inhibitor levilimab (LVL) in subjects with severe COVID-19. SUBJECTS: The study included 217 patients. The eligible were men and non-pregnant women aged 18 years or older, hospitalized for severe COVID-19 pneumonia. TREATMENT: 206 subjects were randomized (1:1) to receive single subcutaneous administration of LVL 324 mg or placebo, both in combination with standard of care (SOC). 204 patients received allocated therapy. After the LVL/placebo administration in case of deterioration of symptoms, the investigator could perform a single open-label LVL 324 mg administration as the rescue therapy. METHODS: The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients with sustained clinical improvement on the 7-category ordinal scale on Day 14. All efficacy data obtained after rescue therapy administration were considered missing. For primary efficacy analysis, all subjects with missing data were considered non-responders. RESULTS: 63.1% and 42.7% of patients in the LVL and in the placebo groups, respectively, achieved sustained clinical improvement on Day 14 (P = .0017). The frequency of adverse drug reactions was comparable between the groups. CONCLUSION: In patients with radiologically confirmed SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, requiring or not oxygen therapy (but not ventilation) with no signs of other active infection administration of LVL + SOC results in an increase of sustained clinical improvement rate. TRAIL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at the US National Institutes of Health (ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT04397562).


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Receptors, Interleukin-6/antagonists & inhibitors , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Double-Blind Method , Endpoint Determination , Female , Humans , Injections, Subcutaneous , Male , Middle Aged , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy , Respiration, Artificial , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
6.
N Engl J Med ; 385(9): 803-814, 2021 08 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1373469

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Additional interventions are needed to reduce the morbidity and mortality caused by malaria. METHODS: We conducted a two-part, phase 1 clinical trial to assess the safety and pharmacokinetics of CIS43LS, an antimalarial monoclonal antibody with an extended half-life, and its efficacy against infection with Plasmodium falciparum. Part A of the trial assessed the safety, initial side-effect profile, and pharmacokinetics of CIS43LS in healthy adults who had never had malaria. Participants received CIS43LS subcutaneously or intravenously at one of three escalating dose levels. A subgroup of participants from Part A continued to Part B, and some received a second CIS43LS infusion. Additional participants were enrolled in Part B and received CIS43LS intravenously. To assess the protective efficacy of CIS43LS, some participants underwent controlled human malaria infection in which they were exposed to mosquitoes carrying P. falciparum sporozoites 4 to 36 weeks after administration of CIS43LS. RESULTS: A total of 25 participants received CIS43LS at a dose of 5 mg per kilogram of body weight, 20 mg per kilogram, or 40 mg per kilogram, and 4 of the 25 participants received a second dose (20 mg per kilogram regardless of initial dose). No safety concerns were identified. We observed dose-dependent increases in CIS43LS serum concentrations, with a half-life of 56 days. None of the 9 participants who received CIS43LS, as compared with 5 of 6 control participants who did not receive CIS43LS, had parasitemia according to polymerase-chain-reaction testing through 21 days after controlled human malaria infection. Two participants who received 40 mg per kilogram of CIS43LS and underwent controlled human malaria infection approximately 36 weeks later had no parasitemia, with serum concentrations of CIS43LS of 46 and 57 µg per milliliter at the time of controlled human malaria infection. CONCLUSIONS: Among adults who had never had malaria infection or vaccination, administration of the long-acting monoclonal antibody CIS43LS prevented malaria after controlled infection. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; VRC 612 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04206332.).


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antimalarials/therapeutic use , Malaria, Falciparum/prevention & control , Adult , Antibodies, Monoclonal/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal/adverse effects , Antibodies, Monoclonal/pharmacokinetics , Antibodies, Protozoan/blood , Antimalarials/administration & dosage , Antimalarials/adverse effects , Antimalarials/pharmacokinetics , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Healthy Volunteers , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous/adverse effects , Injections, Subcutaneous/adverse effects , Middle Aged , Plasmodium falciparum/immunology , Plasmodium falciparum/isolation & purification
8.
N Engl J Med ; 385(7): 609-617, 2021 08 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1354155

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The role of factor XI in the pathogenesis of postoperative venous thromboembolism is uncertain. Abelacimab is a monoclonal antibody that binds to factor XI and locks it in the zymogen (inactive precursor) conformation. METHODS: In this open-label, parallel-group trial, we randomly assigned 412 patients who were undergoing total knee arthroplasty to receive one of three regimens of abelacimab (30 mg, 75 mg, or 150 mg) administered postoperatively in a single intravenous dose or to receive 40 mg of enoxaparin administered subcutaneously once daily. The primary efficacy outcome was venous thromboembolism, detected by mandatory venography of the leg involved in the operation or objective confirmation of symptomatic events. The principal safety outcome was a composite of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding up to 30 days after surgery. RESULTS: Venous thromboembolism occurred in 13 of 102 patients (13%) in the 30-mg abelacimab group, 5 of 99 patients (5%) in the 75-mg abelacimab group, and 4 of 98 patients (4%) in the 150-mg abelacimab group, as compared with 22 of 101 patients (22%) in the enoxaparin group. The 30-mg abelacimab regimen was noninferior to enoxaparin, and the 75-mg and 150-mg abelacimab regimens were superior to enoxaparin (P<0.001). Bleeding occurred in 2%, 2%, and none of the patients in the 30-mg, 75-mg, and 150-mg abelacimab groups, respectively, and in none of the patients in the enoxaparin group. CONCLUSIONS: This trial showed that factor XI is important for the development of postoperative venous thromboembolism. Factor XI inhibition with a single intravenous dose of abelacimab after total knee arthroplasty was effective for the prevention of venous thromboembolism and was associated with a low risk of bleeding. (Funded by Anthos Therapeutics; ANT-005 TKA EudraCT number, 2019-003756-37.).


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee , Enoxaparin/therapeutic use , Factor XI/antagonists & inhibitors , Postoperative Complications/prevention & control , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & control , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Enoxaparin/adverse effects , Factor XI/metabolism , Female , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous , Injections, Subcutaneous , Male , Middle Aged , Partial Thromboplastin Time
9.
N Engl J Med ; 385(13): 1184-1195, 2021 09 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1341035

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: REGEN-COV (previously known as REGN-COV2), a combination of the monoclonal antibodies casirivimab and imdevimab, has been shown to markedly reduce the risk of hospitalization or death among high-risk persons with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). Whether subcutaneous REGEN-COV prevents severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and subsequent Covid-19 in persons at high risk for infection because of household exposure to a person with SARS-CoV-2 infection is unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, participants (≥12 years of age) who were enrolled within 96 hours after a household contact received a diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection to receive a total dose of 1200 mg of REGEN-COV or matching placebo administered by means of subcutaneous injection. At the time of randomization, participants were stratified according to the results of the local diagnostic assay for SARS-CoV-2 and according to age. The primary efficacy end point was the development of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection through day 28 in participants who did not have SARS-CoV-2 infection (as measured by reverse-transcriptase-quantitative polymerase-chain-reaction assay) or previous immunity (seronegativity). RESULTS: Symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection developed in 11 of 753 participants in the REGEN-COV group (1.5%) and in 59 of 752 participants in the placebo group (7.8%) (relative risk reduction [1 minus the relative risk], 81.4%; P<0.001). In weeks 2 to 4, a total of 2 of 753 participants in the REGEN-COV group (0.3%) and 27 of 752 participants in the placebo group (3.6%) had symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (relative risk reduction, 92.6%). REGEN-COV also prevented symptomatic and asymptomatic infections overall (relative risk reduction, 66.4%). Among symptomatic infected participants, the median time to resolution of symptoms was 2 weeks shorter with REGEN-COV than with placebo (1.2 weeks and 3.2 weeks, respectively), and the duration of a high viral load (>104 copies per milliliter) was shorter (0.4 weeks and 1.3 weeks, respectively). No dose-limiting toxic effects of REGEN-COV were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Subcutaneous REGEN-COV prevented symptomatic Covid-19 and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in previously uninfected household contacts of infected persons. Among the participants who became infected, REGEN-COV reduced the duration of symptomatic disease and the duration of a high viral load. (Funded by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04452318.).


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Asymptomatic Diseases , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/virology , Child , Double-Blind Method , Drug Combinations , Female , Humans , Incidence , Injections, Subcutaneous , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Acuity , Viral Load , Young Adult
11.
Chest ; 160(1): 74-84, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1258346

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severity of illness in COVID-19 is consistently lower in women. A focus on sex as a biological factor may suggest a potential therapeutic intervention for this disease. We assessed whether adding progesterone to standard of care (SOC) would improve clinical outcomes of hospitalized men with moderate to severe COVID-19. RESEARCH QUESTION: Does short-term subcutaneous administration of progesterone safely improve clinical outcome in hypoxemic men hospitalized with COVID-19? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a pilot, randomized, open-label, controlled trial of subcutaneous progesterone in men hospitalized with confirmed moderate to severe COVID-19. Patients were randomly assigned to receive SOC plus progesterone (100 mg subcutaneously twice daily for up to 5 days) or SOC alone. In addition to assessment of safety, the primary outcome was change in clinical status on day 7. Length of hospital stay and number of days on supplemental oxygen were key secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Forty-two patients were enrolled from April 2020 to August 2020; 22 were randomized to the control group and 20 to the progesterone group. Two patients from the progesterone group withdrew from the study before receiving progesterone. There was a 1.5-point overall improvement in median clinical status score on a seven-point ordinal scale from baseline to day 7 in patients in the progesterone group as compared with control subjects (95% CI, 0.0-2.0; P = .024). There were no serious adverse events attributable to progesterone. Patients treated with progesterone required three fewer days of supplemental oxygen (median, 4.5 vs 7.5 days) and were hospitalized for 2.5 fewer days (median, 7.0 vs 9.5 days) as compared with control subjects. INTERPRETATION: Progesterone at a dose of 100 mg, twice daily by subcutaneous injection in addition to SOC, may represent a safe and effective approach for treatment in hypoxemic men with moderate to severe COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT04365127; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Progesterone/administration & dosage , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , COVID-19/physiopathology , COVID-19/therapy , Clinical Protocols/standards , Drug Monitoring , Humans , Hypoxia/diagnosis , Hypoxia/etiology , Injections, Subcutaneous , Male , Middle Aged , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy/methods , Pilot Projects , Progestins/administration & dosage , Severity of Illness Index , Treatment Outcome
14.
Int Arch Allergy Immunol ; 182(7): 631-636, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1197289

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT) is an effective treatment for allergic rhinitis, asthma, and venom allergy. Compliance is essential for SCIT to obtain maximal benefit as it is a long-term treatment. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the level of real-life SCIT compliance in pediatric patients and the associated factors. Additional aims were to determine how SCIT compliance was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and why some patients dropped out SCIT. METHOD: Pediatric patients diagnosed with allergic rhinitis, allergic asthma, or venom allergy that received SCIT between September 2012 and July 2020 were analyzed. RESULTS: The study included 201 children (66.7% male) with a median (interquartile range) age of 12.8 years (9.4-15.2) at the time of the first SCIT injection. The overall compliance rate before COVID-19 pandemic was 86.1%. Short SCIT follow-up time and venom anaphylaxis were found to be risk factors for drop out. The leading causes of drop outs were moving to another city/country (32.1%), symptom improvement (17.8%), treatment ineffectiveness (14.2%), and adverse reactions (14.2%). Among the 108 patients that were still receiving SCIT during the COVID-19 pandemic, 31 (28.7%) dropped out the therapy. The most frequent reasons for drop-out were fear of being infected with COVID-19 (35.4%) and thinking that the AIT practise stopped due to COVID-19 pandemic (29%). Male gender and older age were found to be the independent risk factors for drop-out of SCIT. CONCLUSIONS: Real life compliance in children was found 13.9% and it was higher than adults. Nearly one-third of children dropped out during the CO-VID-19 pandemic. Male gender and older age are associated with SCIT drop-out during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Desensitization, Immunologic , Hypersensitivity, Immediate/therapy , Patient Compliance/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/psychology , Child , Desensitization, Immunologic/adverse effects , Desensitization, Immunologic/methods , Desensitization, Immunologic/psychology , Desensitization, Immunologic/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Injections, Subcutaneous , Logistic Models , Male , Patient Compliance/psychology , Patient Dropouts/psychology , Patient Dropouts/statistics & numerical data , Turkey
15.
Nat Commun ; 12(1): 1967, 2021 03 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1159789

ABSTRACT

Type III interferons have been touted as promising therapeutics in outpatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We conducted a randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled trial (NCT04331899) in 120 outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19 to determine whether a single, 180 mcg subcutaneous dose of Peginterferon Lambda-1a (Lambda) within 72 hours of diagnosis could shorten the duration of viral shedding (primary endpoint) or symptoms (secondary endpoint). In both the 60 patients receiving Lambda and 60 receiving placebo, the median time to cessation of viral shedding was 7 days (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56 to 1.19). Symptoms resolved in 8 and 9 days in Lambda and placebo, respectively, and symptom duration did not differ significantly between groups (HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.39). Both Lambda and placebo were well-tolerated, though liver transaminase elevations were more common in the Lambda vs. placebo arm (15/60 vs 5/60; p = 0.027). In this study, a single dose of subcutaneous Peginterferon Lambda-1a neither shortened the duration of SARS-CoV-2 viral shedding nor improved symptoms in outpatients with uncomplicated COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/administration & dosage , COVID-19/drug therapy , Interleukins/administration & dosage , Polyethylene Glycols/administration & dosage , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/virology , Female , Humans , Injections, Subcutaneous , Male , Middle Aged , Outpatients , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Single-Blind Method , Treatment Failure , Virus Shedding/drug effects , Young Adult
16.
Int J Pharm ; 597: 120329, 2021 Mar 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1152404

ABSTRACT

There has been a growing and evolving research to find a treatment or a prevention against coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). Though mass vaccination will certainly help in reducing number of COVID-19 patients, an effective therapeutic measure must be available too. Intravenous remdesivir (RDV) was the first drug receiving Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for the treatment of COVID-19. However, in a pandemic like COVID-19, it is essential that drug formulations are readily available, affordable and convenient to administer to every patient around the globe. In this study, we have developed a Self-injectable extended release subcutaneous injection of Remdesivir (SelfExRem) for the treatment of COVID-19. As opposed to intravenous injection, extended release subcutaneous injection has the benefits of reducing face-to-face contact, minimizing hospitalization, reducing dosing frequency and reducing overall health care cost. SelfExRem was developed using a biodegradable polymer, poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA), dissolved in a biocompatible vehicle. Six different batches were formulated using 2 different grades of low molecular weight PLGA and 3 different PLGA concentration. The force of injection of various polymeric solutions through 23-30-gauge needles were analyzed using a TA.XTplus texture analyzer. The time required for injection was evaluated both manually and by using an autoinjector. In vitro release of all the batches were carried out in 1% v/v tween 80 in phosphate buffer saline. The study indicated that SelfExRem developed with15% w/v PLGA(75:25) provided a steady release of drug for 48 h and may be a breakthrough approach for the treatment of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , COVID-19 , Delayed-Action Preparations/pharmacology , Adenosine Monophosphate/pharmacology , Alanine/pharmacology , Antiviral Agents/pharmacology , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Drug Evaluation, Preclinical , Humans , Injections, Subcutaneous/methods , Prodrugs/pharmacology , SARS-CoV-2
17.
N Engl J Med ; 384(11): 989, 2021 03 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1139778

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a global health challenge with few pharmacologic options. Whether adults with obesity can achieve weight loss with once-weekly semaglutide at a dose of 2.4 mg as an adjunct to lifestyle intervention has not been confirmed. METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we enrolled 1961 adults with a body-mass index (the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) of 30 or greater (≥27 in persons with ≥1 weight-related coexisting condition), who did not have diabetes, and randomly assigned them, in a 2:1 ratio, to 68 weeks of treatment with once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide (at a dose of 2.4 mg) or placebo, plus lifestyle intervention. The coprimary end points were the percentage change in body weight and weight reduction of at least 5%. The primary estimand (a precise description of the treatment effect reflecting the objective of the clinical trial) assessed effects regardless of treatment discontinuation or rescue interventions. RESULTS: The mean change in body weight from baseline to week 68 was -14.9% in the semaglutide group as compared with -2.4% with placebo, for an estimated treatment difference of -12.4 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], -13.4 to -11.5; P<0.001). More participants in the semaglutide group than in the placebo group achieved weight reductions of 5% or more (1047 participants [86.4%] vs. 182 [31.5%]), 10% or more (838 [69.1%] vs. 69 [12.0%]), and 15% or more (612 [50.5%] vs. 28 [4.9%]) at week 68 (P<0.001 for all three comparisons of odds). The change in body weight from baseline to week 68 was -15.3 kg in the semaglutide group as compared with -2.6 kg in the placebo group (estimated treatment difference, -12.7 kg; 95% CI, -13.7 to -11.7). Participants who received semaglutide had a greater improvement with respect to cardiometabolic risk factors and a greater increase in participant-reported physical functioning from baseline than those who received placebo. Nausea and diarrhea were the most common adverse events with semaglutide; they were typically transient and mild-to-moderate in severity and subsided with time. More participants in the semaglutide group than in the placebo group discontinued treatment owing to gastrointestinal events (59 [4.5%] vs. 5 [0.8%]). CONCLUSIONS: In participants with overweight or obesity, 2.4 mg of semaglutide once weekly plus lifestyle intervention was associated with sustained, clinically relevant reduction in body weight. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; STEP 1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03548935).


Subject(s)
Anti-Obesity Agents/administration & dosage , Glucagon-Like Peptide 1/agonists , Glucagon-Like Peptides/administration & dosage , Obesity/drug therapy , Adult , Anti-Obesity Agents/adverse effects , Body Composition/drug effects , Body Mass Index , Cholelithiasis/chemically induced , Diarrhea/chemically induced , Double-Blind Method , Female , Glucagon-Like Peptides/adverse effects , Healthy Lifestyle , Humans , Injections, Subcutaneous , Lipids/blood , Male , Middle Aged , Nausea/chemically induced , Obesity/complications , Prediabetic State/complications , Weight Loss/drug effects
18.
Drugs ; 81(3): 389-395, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1130968

ABSTRACT

Inclisiran (Leqvio®; Novartis) is a first-in-class, cholesterol-lowering small interfering RNA (siRNA) conjugated to triantennary N-acetylgalactosamine carbohydrates (GalNAc). Inclisiran received its first approval in December 2020 in the EU for use in adults with primary hypercholesterolaemia (heterozygous familial and non-familial) or mixed dyslipidaemia, as an adjunct to diet. It is intended for use in combination with a statin or a statin with other lipid-lowering therapies in patients unable to reach low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goals with the maximum tolerated statin dose. In patients who are statin-intolerant or for whom a statin is contraindicated, inclisiran can be used alone or in combination with other lipid-lowering therapies. Inclisiran is administered as a twice-yearly subcutaneous injection. This article summarizes the milestones in the development of inclisiran leading to this first approval for primary hypercholesterolaemia or mixed dyslipidaemia.


Subject(s)
Anticholesteremic Agents/therapeutic use , Dyslipidemias/drug therapy , Hypercholesterolemia/drug therapy , RNA, Small Interfering/therapeutic use , Anticholesteremic Agents/administration & dosage , Humans , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Injections, Subcutaneous , RNA, Small Interfering/administration & dosage
19.
Elife ; 102021 03 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1121691

ABSTRACT

Background: It was studied if early suPAR-guided anakinra treatment can prevent severe respiratory failure (SRF) of COVID-19. Methods: A total of 130 patients with suPAR ≥6 ng/ml were assigned to subcutaneous anakinra 100 mg once daily for 10 days. Primary outcome was SRF incidence by day 14 defined as any respiratory ratio below 150 mmHg necessitating mechanical or non-invasive ventilation. Main secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality and inflammatory mediators; 28-day WHO-CPS was explored. Propensity-matched standard-of care comparators were studied. Results: 22.3% with anakinra treatment and 59.2% comparators (hazard ratio, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.20-0.46) progressed into SRF; 30-day mortality was 11.5% and 22.3% respectively (hazard ratio 0.49; 95% CI 0.25-0.97). Anakinra was associated with decrease in circulating interleukin (IL)-6, sCD163 and sIL2-R; IL-10/IL-6 ratio on day 7 was inversely associated with SOFA score; patients were allocated to less severe WHO-CPS strata. Conclusions: Early suPAR-guided anakinra decreased SRF and restored the pro-/anti-inflammatory balance. Funding: This study was funded by the Hellenic Institute for the Study of Sepsis, Technomar Shipping Inc, Swedish Orphan Biovitrum, and the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme. Clinical trial number: NCT04357366.


People infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which causes COVID-19, can develop severe respiratory failure and require a ventilator to keep breathing, but this does not happen to every infected individual. Measuring a blood protein called suPAR (soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor) may help identify patients at the greatest risk of developing severe respiratory failure and requiring a ventilator. Previous investigations have suggested that measuring suPAR can identify pneumonia patients at highest risk for developing respiratory failure. The protein can be measured by taking a blood sample, and its levels provide a snapshot of how the body's immune system is reacting to infection, and of how it may respond to treatment. Anakinra is a drug that forms part of a class of medications called interleukin antagonists. It is commonly prescribed alone or in combination with other medications to reduce pain and swelling associated with rheumatoid arthritis. Kyriazopoulou et al. investigated whether treating COVID-19 patients who had developed pneumonia with anakinra could prevent the use of a ventilator and lower the risk of death. The findings show that treating COVID-19 patients with an injection of 100 milligrams of anakinra for ten days may be an effective approach because the drug combats inflammation. Kyriazopoulou et al. examined various markers of the immune response and discovered that anakinra was able to improve immune function, protecting a significant number of patients from going on a ventilator. The drug was also found to be safe and cause no significant adverse side effects. Administering anakinra decreased of the risk of progression into severe respiratory failure by 70%, and reduced death rates significantly. These results suggest that it may be beneficial to use suPAR as an early biomarker for identifying those individuals at highest risk for severe respiratory failure, and then treat them with anakinra. While the findings are promising, they must be validated in larger studies.


Subject(s)
Anti-Inflammatory Agents/administration & dosage , COVID-19/drug therapy , Interleukin 1 Receptor Antagonist Protein/administration & dosage , Respiratory Insufficiency/prevention & control , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antigens, CD/blood , Antigens, Differentiation, Myelomonocytic/blood , COVID-19/mortality , Female , Humans , Incidence , Injections, Subcutaneous , Interleukin-10/blood , Interleukin-6/blood , Male , Middle Aged , Receptors, Cell Surface/blood , Receptors, Urokinase Plasminogen Activator/blood , Receptors, Urokinase Plasminogen Activator/metabolism , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Insufficiency/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Standard of Care , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...