Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 7 de 7
Filtrar
1.
RMD Open ; 9(2)2023 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2299759

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To assess outcomes in giant cell arteritis (GCA) patients during and after long-term tocilizumab (TCZ) treatment. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of GCA patients treated with TCZ at a single centre (2010-2022). Time to relapse and annualised relapse rate during and after TCZ treatment, prednisone use, and safety were assessed. Relapse was defined as reappearance of any GCA clinical manifestation that required treatment intensification, regardless of C reactive protein levels and erythrocyte sedimentation rate. RESULTS: Sixty-five GCA patients were followed for a mean (SD) of 3.1 (1.6) years. The mean duration of the initial TCZ course was 1.9 (1.1) years. The Kaplan-Meier (KM)-estimated relapse rate at 18 months on TCZ was 15.5%. The first TCZ course was discontinued due to satisfactory remission achievement in 45 (69.2%) patients and adverse events in 6 (9.2%) patients. KM-estimated relapse rate at 18 months after TCZ discontinuation was 47.3%. Compared with patients stopping TCZ at or before 12 months of treatment, the multivariable adjusted HR (95% CI) for relapse in patients on TCZ beyond 12 months was 0.01 (0.00 to 0.28; p=0.005). Thirteen patients received >1 TCZ course. Multivariable adjusted annualised relapse rates (95% CI) in all periods on and off TCZ aggregated were 0.1 (0.1 to 0.2) and 0.4 (0.3 to 0.7), respectively (p=0.0004). Prednisone was discontinued in 76.9% of patients. During the study, 13 serious adverse events occurred in 11 (16.9%) patients. CONCLUSION: Long-term TCZ treatment was associated with remission maintenance in most patients with GCA. The estimated relapse rate by 18 months after TCZ discontinuation was 47.3%.


Asunto(s)
Arteritis de Células Gigantes , Humanos , Arteritis de Células Gigantes/diagnóstico , Arteritis de Células Gigantes/tratamiento farmacológico , Prednisona/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Recurrencia
2.
Clin Pharmacol Ther ; 113(3): 518-527, 2023 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2272549

RESUMEN

Current clinical research does not reflect the diversity of patient populations, despite continued recommendations to increase enrollment of under-represented racial and ethnic groups. The ramifications of this lack of trial diversity are important because of potential differences between races and ethnicities in response to therapies, which have been observed for drugs across indications. Nonrepresentative research populations limit the generalizability of study results, which may lead to questions about safety and efficacy in certain subgroups of patients and hinder regulators, healthcare providers, and patients in their ability to adequately consider the benefits and risks of a therapeutic treatment across all populations. Renewed efforts to address healthcare disparities and increase diversity in clinical trials have demonstrated that inclusive trials are achievable and can provide scientifically rigorous results, and, thus, should stimulate greater action across all stakeholders. Ensuring that studies throughout the clinical development process include representative populations is a scientific imperative to advance health equity, racial justice, and trust in the safety and efficacy of medical therapies. This article reviews the long-standing lack of diversity and barriers to enrollment of diverse and representative populations in clinical trials, outlines the current evolving trial landscape and the efforts of stakeholders, and provides examples from scientifically rigorous inclusive trials. The goal is to share learnings in a wider context of opportunities to enhance diversity, equity, and inclusion in clinical development while ensuring the safety and efficacy of medical therapies in all populations of patients, and in doing so, provide wider patient access to therapeutic treatments.


Asunto(s)
Etnicidad , Grupos Raciales , Humanos , Motivación
3.
PLoS One ; 18(1): e0277498, 2023.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2197032

RESUMEN

Though mechanical ventilation (MV) is used to treat patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), little is known about the long-term health implications of this treatment. Our objective was to determine the association between MV for treatment of COVID-19 and likelihood of hospital readmission, all-cause mortality, and reason for readmission. This study was a longitudinal observational design with electronic health record (EHR) data collected between 3/1/2020 and 1/31/2021. Participants included 17,652 patients hospitalized for COVID-19 during this period who were followed through 6/30/2021. The primary outcome was readmission to inpatient care following discharge. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality and reason for readmission. Rates of readmission and mortality were compared between ventilated and non-ventilated patients using Cox proportional hazards regression models. Differences in reasons for readmission by MV status were compared using multinomial logistic regression. Patient characteristics and measures of illness severity were balanced between those who were mechanically ventilated and those who were not utilizing 1-to-1 propensity score matching. The sample had a median age of 63 and was 47.1% female. There were 1,131 (6.4%) patients who required MV during their initial hospitalization. Rates (32.1% versus 9.9%) and hazard of readmission were greater for patients requiring MV in the propensity score-matched samples [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) = 3.34 (2.72-4.10)]. Rates (15.3% versus 3.4%) and hazard [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) = 3.12 (2.32-4.20)] of all-cause mortality were also associated with MV status. Ventilated patients were more likely to be readmitted for reasons which were classified as COVID-19, infectious diseases, and respiratory diagnoses compared to non-ventilated patients. Mechanical ventilation is a necessary treatment for severely ill patients. However, it may be associated with adverse outcomes including hospital readmission and death. More intense post-discharge monitoring may be warranted to decrease this associational finding.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Femenino , Masculino , COVID-19/terapia , Alta del Paciente , Respiración Artificial , Cuidados Posteriores , Pacientes Internos , Hospitalización , Readmisión del Paciente , Estudios Retrospectivos
4.
JAMA ; 326(6): 499-518, 2021 08 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1413703

RESUMEN

Importance: Clinical trials assessing the efficacy of IL-6 antagonists in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 have variously reported benefit, no effect, and harm. Objective: To estimate the association between administration of IL-6 antagonists compared with usual care or placebo and 28-day all-cause mortality and other outcomes. Data Sources: Trials were identified through systematic searches of electronic databases between October 2020 and January 2021. Searches were not restricted by trial status or language. Additional trials were identified through contact with experts. Study Selection: Eligible trials randomly assigned patients hospitalized for COVID-19 to a group in whom IL-6 antagonists were administered and to a group in whom neither IL-6 antagonists nor any other immunomodulators except corticosteroids were administered. Among 72 potentially eligible trials, 27 (37.5%) met study selection criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis: In this prospective meta-analysis, risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Inconsistency among trial results was assessed using the I2 statistic. The primary analysis was an inverse variance-weighted fixed-effects meta-analysis of odds ratios (ORs) for 28-day all-cause mortality. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality at 28 days after randomization. There were 9 secondary outcomes including progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death and risk of secondary infection by 28 days. Results: A total of 10 930 patients (median age, 61 years [range of medians, 52-68 years]; 3560 [33%] were women) participating in 27 trials were included. By 28 days, there were 1407 deaths among 6449 patients randomized to IL-6 antagonists and 1158 deaths among 4481 patients randomized to usual care or placebo (summary OR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.79-0.95]; P = .003 based on a fixed-effects meta-analysis). This corresponds to an absolute mortality risk of 22% for IL-6 antagonists compared with an assumed mortality risk of 25% for usual care or placebo. The corresponding summary ORs were 0.83 (95% CI, 0.74-0.92; P < .001) for tocilizumab and 1.08 (95% CI, 0.86-1.36; P = .52) for sarilumab. The summary ORs for the association with mortality compared with usual care or placebo in those receiving corticosteroids were 0.77 (95% CI, 0.68-0.87) for tocilizumab and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.61-1.38) for sarilumab. The ORs for the association with progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death, compared with usual care or placebo, were 0.77 (95% CI, 0.70-0.85) for all IL-6 antagonists, 0.74 (95% CI, 0.66-0.82) for tocilizumab, and 1.00 (95% CI, 0.74-1.34) for sarilumab. Secondary infections by 28 days occurred in 21.9% of patients treated with IL-6 antagonists vs 17.6% of patients treated with usual care or placebo (OR accounting for trial sample sizes, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.85-1.16). Conclusions and Relevance: In this prospective meta-analysis of clinical trials of patients hospitalized for COVID-19, administration of IL-6 antagonists, compared with usual care or placebo, was associated with lower 28-day all-cause mortality. Trial Registration: PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42021230155.


Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/uso terapéutico , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Interleucina-6/antagonistas & inhibidores , Anciano , COVID-19/complicaciones , COVID-19/mortalidad , COVID-19/terapia , Causas de Muerte , Coinfección , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Quimioterapia Combinada , Femenino , Glucocorticoides/uso terapéutico , Hospitalización , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Prospectivos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Respiración Artificial
5.
J Med Virol ; 93(9): 5367-5375, 2021 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1206841

RESUMEN

This study describes the baseline characteristics and treatment patterns of US patients hospitalized with a diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and pulmonary involvement. Patients hospitalized with pulmonary involvement due to COVID-19 (first hospitalization) were identified in the IBM Explorys® electronic health records database. Demographics, baseline clinical characteristics, and in-hospital medications were assessed. For evaluation of in-hospital medications, results were stratified by race, geographic region, age, and month of admission. Of 6564 hospitalized patients with COVID-19-related pulmonary involvement, 50.4% were male, and mean (SD) age was 62.6 (16.4) years; 75.2% and 23.6% of patients were from the South and Midwest, respectively, and 50.2% of patients were African American. Compared with African American patients, a numerically higher proportion of White patients received dexamethasone (19.7% vs. 31.8%, respectively), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs; 27.1% vs. 34.9%), bronchodilators (19.8% vs. 29.5%), and remdesivir (9.3% vs. 21.0%). Numerically higher proportions of White patients than African American patients received select medications in the South but not in the Midwest. Compared with patients in the South, a numerically higher proportion of patients in the Midwest received dexamethasone (20.1% vs. 34.5%, respectively), NSAIDs (19.6% vs. 55.7%), bronchodilators (15.9% vs. 41.3%), and remdesivir (10.6% vs. 23.1%). Inpatient use of hydroxychloroquine decreased over time, whereas the use of dexamethasone and remdesivir increased over time. Among US patients predominantly from the South and Midwest hospitalized with COVID-19 and pulmonary involvement, differences were seen in medication use between different races, geographic regions, and months of hospitalization.


Asunto(s)
Adenosina Monofosfato/análogos & derivados , Alanina/análogos & derivados , Broncodilatadores/uso terapéutico , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Dexametasona/uso terapéutico , Hidroxicloroquina/uso terapéutico , Neumonía/tratamiento farmacológico , SARS-CoV-2/efectos de los fármacos , Adenosina Monofosfato/uso terapéutico , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Alanina/uso terapéutico , Antiinflamatorios/uso terapéutico , Antivirales/uso terapéutico , Población Negra , COVID-19/etnología , COVID-19/patología , COVID-19/virología , Femenino , Hospitalización , Humanos , Pulmón/efectos de los fármacos , Pulmón/patología , Pulmón/virología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neumonía/etnología , Neumonía/patología , Neumonía/virología , Estudios Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2/patogenicidad , SARS-CoV-2/fisiología , Estados Unidos , Población Blanca
6.
N Engl J Med ; 384(1): 20-30, 2021 01 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-983928

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pneumonia is often associated with hyperinflammation. Despite the disproportionate incidence of Covid-19 among underserved and racial and ethnic minority populations, the safety and efficacy of the anti-interleukin-6 receptor antibody tocilizumab in patients from these populations who are hospitalized with Covid-19 pneumonia are unclear. METHODS: We randomly assigned (in a 2:1 ratio) patients hospitalized with Covid-19 pneumonia who were not receiving mechanical ventilation to receive standard care plus one or two doses of either tocilizumab (8 mg per kilogram of body weight intravenously) or placebo. Site selection was focused on the inclusion of sites enrolling high-risk and minority populations. The primary outcome was mechanical ventilation or death by day 28. RESULTS: A total of 389 patients underwent randomization, and the modified intention-to-treat population included 249 patients in the tocilizumab group and 128 patients in the placebo group; 56.0% were Hispanic or Latino, 14.9% were Black, 12.7% were American Indian or Alaska Native, 12.7% were non-Hispanic White, and 3.7% were of other or unknown race or ethnic group. The cumulative percentage of patients who had received mechanical ventilation or who had died by day 28 was 12.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.5 to 16.9) in the tocilizumab group and 19.3% (95% CI, 13.3 to 27.4) in the placebo group (hazard ratio for mechanical ventilation or death, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.97; P = 0.04 by the log-rank test). Clinical failure as assessed in a time-to-event analysis favored tocilizumab over placebo (hazard ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.93). Death from any cause by day 28 occurred in 10.4% of the patients in the tocilizumab group and 8.6% of those in the placebo group (weighted difference, 2.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -5.2 to 7.8). In the safety population, serious adverse events occurred in 38 of 250 patients (15.2%) in the tocilizumab group and 25 of 127 patients (19.7%) in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized patients with Covid-19 pneumonia who were not receiving mechanical ventilation, tocilizumab reduced the likelihood of progression to the composite outcome of mechanical ventilation or death, but it did not improve survival. No new safety signals were identified. (Funded by Genentech; EMPACTA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04372186.).


Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/uso terapéutico , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Adulto , Anciano , COVID-19/etnología , COVID-19/mortalidad , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Femenino , Hospitalización , Humanos , Análisis de Intención de Tratar , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neumonía Viral/tratamiento farmacológico , Respiración Artificial , Tasa de Supervivencia
7.
Adv Ther ; 37(12): 4981-4995, 2020 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-843146

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can present as a range of symptoms, from mild to critical; lower pulmonary involvement, including pneumonia, is often associated with severe and critical cases. Understanding the baseline characteristics of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 illness is essential for effectively targeting clinical care and allocating resources. This study aimed to describe baseline demographics and clinical characteristics of US patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and pulmonary involvement. METHODS: US patients with COVID-19 and pulmonary involvement during an inpatient admission from December 1, 2019, to May 20, 2020, were identified using the IBM Explorys® electronic health records database. Baseline (up to 12 months prior to first COVID-19 hospitalization) demographics and clinical characteristics and preadmission (14 days to 1 day prior to admission) pulmonary diagnoses were assessed. Patients were stratified by sex, age, race, and geographic region. RESULTS: Overall, 3471 US patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and pulmonary involvement were included. The mean (SD) age was 63.5 (16.3) years; 51.2% of patients were female, 55.0% African American, 81.6% from the South, and 16.8% from the Midwest. The most common comorbidities included hypertension (27.7%), diabetes (17.3%), hyperlipidemia (16.3%), and obesity (9.7%). Cough (27.3%) and dyspnea (15.2%) were the most common preadmission pulmonary symptoms. African American patients were younger (mean [SD], 62.5 [15.4] vs. 67.8 [6.2]) with higher mean (SD) body mass index (33.66 [9.46] vs. 30.42 [7.86]) and prevalence of diabetes (19.8% vs. 16.7%) and lower prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (5.6% vs. 8.2%) and smoking/tobacco use (28.1% vs. 37.2%) than White patients. CONCLUSIONS: Among US patients primarily from the South and Midwest hospitalized with COVID-19 and pulmonary involvement, the most common comorbidities were hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and obesity. Differences observed between African American and White patients should be considered in the context of the complex factors underlying racial disparities in COVID-19.


Asunto(s)
Negro o Afroamericano/estadística & datos numéricos , Infecciones por Coronavirus , Enfermedades Pulmonares , Enfermedades no Transmisibles/epidemiología , Pandemias , Neumonía Viral , Población Blanca/estadística & datos numéricos , Betacoronavirus/aislamiento & purificación , COVID-19 , Comorbilidad , Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Infecciones por Coronavirus/terapia , Demografía , Femenino , Disparidades en el Estado de Salud , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Enfermedades Pulmonares/diagnóstico , Enfermedades Pulmonares/etnología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neumonía Viral/diagnóstico , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , Neumonía Viral/etnología , Neumonía Viral/etiología , Neumonía Viral/terapia , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , SARS-CoV-2 , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Fumar/etnología , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA