[Treatment of toxic hepatitis in COVID-19 patients].

BACKGROUND: The article reflects the clinical significance of the early diagnosis of toxic hepatitis in patients who have undergone a new coronavirus infection with the determination of clinical and laboratory predictors of the response to therapy. A dynamic analysis of the effectiveness of toxic hepatitis therapy in patients of three experimental groups and a control group is presented. AIM: The aim of the present study is to increase the effectiveness of the treatment of toxic hepatitis in patients who have undergone COVID-19. MATERIALS AND METHODS: On the basis of the newly created infection centers of the Central Clinical Hospital "RZhD-Medicine" and Vishnevsky 3-rd Central Military Clinical Hospital 996 patients with COVID-19, who had clinical and laboratory signs of toxic liver damage (cytolytic and/or cholestatic syndromes) against the background of COVID-19 therapy. RESULTS: On the 14th day from the start of therapy in group 3, there was a significant decrease in the clinical manifestations of jaundice in 163 (72.8%) patients, on the 21st day of treatment, this symptom was stopped in all patients. In groups 1 and 2, the decrease in clinical manifestations of jaundice was significantly lower - 122 (55.2%) and 134 (58.8%); p<0.05. At the end of therapy, no manifestations of jaundice were observed in all experimental groups, while in the control group, symptom reduction was achieved only in 47 (14.5%) patients. CONCLUSION: The use of drugs with hepatoprotective effect in the form of monotherapy in groups 1 (UDCA) and 2 (ademethionine) showed a low therapeutic effect with positive dynamics of clinical and laboratory indicators of toxic hepatitis activity. The use of combined treatment in group 3 (UDCA and ademethionine) demonstrated the maximum therapeutic effect, pronounced positive dynamics in the form of normalization of clinical and laboratory indicators of toxic hepatitis activity.

Combination Chemotherapy with Selected Polyphenols in Preclinical and Clinical Studies-An Update Overview.

This review article describes studies published over the past five years on the combination of polyphenols, which are the most studied in the field of anticancer effects (curcumin, quercetin, resveratrol, epigallocatechin gallate, and apigenin) and chemotherapeutics such as cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, paclitaxel, etc. According to WHO data, research has been limited to five cancers with the highest morbidity rate (lung, colorectal, liver, gastric, and breast cancer). A systematic review of articles published in the past five years (from January 2018 to January 2023) was carried out with the help of all Web of Science databases and the available base of clinical studies. Based on the preclinical studies presented in this review, polyphenols can enhance drug efficacy and reduce chemoresistance through different molecular mechanisms. Considering the large number of studies, curcumin could be a molecule in future chemotherapy cocktails. One of the main problems in clinical research is related to the limited bioavailability of most polyphenols. The design of a new co-delivery system for drugs and polyphenols is essential for future clinical research. Some polyphenols work in synergy with chemotherapeutic drugs, but some polyphenols can act antagonistically, so caution is always required.

Early experimental COVID-19 therapies: associations with length of hospital stay, mortality and related costs.

AIMS OF THE STUDY: Hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir have been used as experimental therapies to treat COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic. Randomised controlled trials have recently shown that there are no meaningful benefits of these two therapies in hospitalised patients. Uncertainty remains regarding the potential harmful impact of these therapies as very early treatments and their burden to the health care system. The present study investigated the length of hospital stay (LOS), mortality, and costs of hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir or their combination in comparison with standard of care among patients hospitalised for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: This retrospective observational cohort study took place in the Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland (n = 840) between 26 February and 31 May 2020. Demographics, treatment regimens, comorbidities, the modified National Early Warning Score (mNEWS) on admission, and contraindications to COVID-19 treatment options were assessed. Outcomes included LOS, in-hospital mortality, and drug and LOS costs. RESULTS: After successful propensity score matching, patients treated with (1) hydroxychloroquine, (2) lopinavir/ritonavir or (3) their combination had on average 3.75 additional hospitalisation days (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.37–6.12, p = 0.002), 1.23 additional hospitalisation days (95% CI −1.24 – 3.51, p = 0.319), and 4.19 additional hospitalisation days (95% CI 1.52–5.31, p <0.001), respectively, compared with patients treated with the standard of care. Neither experimental therapy was significantly associated with mortality. These additional hospital days amounted to 1010.77 additional days for hydroxychloroquine and hydroxychloroquine combined with lopinavir/ritonavir, resulting in an additional cost of US$ 2,492,214 (95%CI US$ 916,839–3,450,619). CONCLUSIONS: Prescribing experimental therapies for COVID-19 was not associated with a reduced LOS and might have increased the pressure put on healthcare systems.

A study about management of drugs for leprosy patients under medical monitoring: A solution based on AHP-Electre decision-making methods.

Leprosy, also known as Hansen's, is one of the listed neglected tropical diseases as a major health problem global. Treatment is one of the main alternatives, however, the scarcity of medication and its poor distribution are important factors that have driven the spread of the disease, leading to irreversible and multi-resistant complications. This paper uses a distribution methodology to optimize medication administration, taking into account the most relevant attributes for the epidemiological profile of patients and the deficit in treatment via Polychemotherapy. Multi-criteria Decision Methods were applied based on AHP-Electre model in a database with information from patients in the state of Para between 2015 and 2020. The results pointed out that 84% of individuals did not receive any treatment and, among these, the method obtained a gain in the distribution of 68% in patients with positive diagnosis for leprosy.

Treating asthma in the time of COVID.

The Precision Interventions for Severe and/or Exacerbation-Prone Asthma clinical trials network is actively assessing novel treatments for severe asthma during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic and has needed to adapt to various clinical dilemmas posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Pharmacologic interactions between established asthma therapies and novel drug interventions for COVID-19 infection, including antivirals, biologics, and vaccines, have emerged as a critical and unanticipated issue in the clinical care of asthma. In particular, impaired metabolism of some long-acting beta-2 agonists by the cytochrome P4503A4 enzyme in the setting of antiviral treatment using ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir (NVM/r, brand name Paxlovid) may increase risk for adverse cardiovascular events. Although available data have documented the potential for such interactions, these issues are largely unappreciated by clinicians who treat asthma, or those dispensing COVID-19 interventions in patients who happen to have asthma. Because these drug-drug interactions have not previously been relevant to patient care, clinicians have had no guidance on management strategies to reduce potentially serious interactions between treatments for asthma and COVID-19. The Precision Interventions for Severe and/or Exacerbation-Prone Asthma network considered the available literature and product information, and herein share our considerations and plans for treating asthma within the context of these novel COVID-19-related therapies.

Helicobacter pylori eradication rates using clarithromycin and levofloxacin-based regimens in patients with previous COVID-19 treatment: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) is affecting half of the globe. It is considered a main causative organism of chronic gastritis, peptic ulcer disease, and different gastric maliganacies. It has been also correlated to extraintestinal diseases, including refractory iron deficiency anaemia, vitamin B12 deficiency, and immune thrombocytopenic purpura. The misuse of antibiotics during the coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic time can affect H. pylori eradication rates. Our aim was to compare the efficacy of clarithromycin versus levofloxacin-based regimens for H. pylori treatment in naïve patients after the COVID-19 pandemic misuse of antibiotics. METHODS: A total of 270 naïve H. pylori infected patients with previous treatment for COVID-19 more than 3 months before enrolment were recruited. Patients were randomized to receive either clarithromycin, esomeprazole, and amoxicillin, or levofloxacin, esomeprazole, and amoxicillin. RESULTS: A total of 270 naïve H. pylori infected patients with previous treatment for COVID-19 more than 3 months before enrolment were included, 135 in each arm. In total, 19 patients in the clarithromycin group and 18 patients in the levofloxacin group stopped treatment after 2-4 days because of side effects or were lost for follow-up. Finally, 116 subjects in the clarithromycin group and 117 in the levofloxacin group were assessed. The eradication rates in intention to treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP) analyses were: group I, 55.56% and 64.66%; and Group II, 64.44% and 74.36% respectively (p = 0.11). CONCLUSION: As COVID-19 pandemic has moved forward fast, high resistance rates of H. pylori to both clarithromycin and levofloxacin were developed after less than two years from the start of the pandemic. Molecular & genetic testing is highly recommended to identify antimicrobial resistance patterns. Strategies to prevent antibiotic misuse in the treatment of COVID-19 are needed to prevent more antibiotic resistance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered on Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05035186. Date of registration is 2-09-2021.

The Effectiveness of Antiplatelet Therapy and the Factors Influencing It in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background and Objectives: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is essential in the treatment of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of antiplatelet medication in our practice and to investigate the factors that influence it. Materials and Methods: A prospective cohort observational study was conducted, in which 193 patients with ACS were enrolled. The patients were stented in the catheterization laboratory between May 2019 and October 2020, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, and were receiving DAPT. Their platelet functions were tested using a Multiplate Analyzer. In addition to this, clinical data, demographics, laboratory tests, and cardiovascular risk factors were also analyzed. Results: 43.46% of the patients treated with aspirin were found to be resistant to it. This phenomenon was more common in men (48.17% vs. 31.48%, p = 0.036), and it was associated with being under the age of 50 (OR: 2.08; 95% CI: 1.11-3.90) and weighing over 70 kg (OR: 3.00; 95% CI: 1.21-7.40). Most of the patients treated with clopidogrel were in the optimal treatment window, while about half of the patients treated with ticagrelor had an exaggerated pharmacological response. Among the laboratory parameters, leukocytosis and platelet count were found to be determinants of platelet reactivity for both the aspirin and ticagrelor treatments. Conclusions: Many patients treated with antiplatelet agents are outside of the treatment window. The results obtained showed that low doses of gastro-resistant aspirin tablets are ineffective, and their efficacy can be influenced by various clinical and laboratory factors. Patients receiving ticagrelor have significantly reduced platelet reactivity, influenced only by certain laboratory indicators. The pandemic significantly influenced the results of the platelet aggregation tests only in patients treated with clopidogrel.

Association of Treatment With Hydroxychloroquine or Azithromycin With In-Hospital Mortality in Patients With COVID-19 in New York State.

Importance: Hydroxychloroquine, with or without azithromycin, has been considered as a possible therapeutic agent for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, there are limited data on efficacy and associated adverse events. Objective: To describe the association between use of hydroxychloroquine, with or without azithromycin, and clinical outcomes among hospital inpatients diagnosed with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective multicenter cohort study of patients from a random sample of all admitted patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 in 25 hospitals, representing 88.2% of patients with COVID-19 in the New York metropolitan region. Eligible patients were admitted for at least 24 hours between March 15 and 28, 2020. Medications, preexisting conditions, clinical measures on admission, outcomes, and adverse events were abstracted from medical records. The date of final follow-up was April 24, 2020. Exposures: Receipt of both hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine alone, azithromycin alone, or neither. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were cardiac arrest and abnormal electrocardiogram findings (arrhythmia or QT prolongation). Results: Among 1438 hospitalized patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 (858 [59.7%] male, median age, 63 years), those receiving hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, or both were more likely than those not receiving either drug to have diabetes, respiratory rate >22/min, abnormal chest imaging findings, O2 saturation lower than 90%, and aspartate aminotransferase greater than 40 U/L. Overall in-hospital mortality was 20.3% (95% CI, 18.2%-22.4%). The probability of death for patients receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin was 189/735 (25.7% [95% CI, 22.3%-28.9%]), hydroxychloroquine alone, 54/271 (19.9% [95% CI, 15.2%-24.7%]), azithromycin alone, 21/211 (10.0% [95% CI, 5.9%-14.0%]), and neither drug, 28/221 (12.7% [95% CI, 8.3%-17.1%]). In adjusted Cox proportional hazards models, compared with patients receiving neither drug, there were no significant differences in mortality for patients receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin (HR, 1.35 [95% CI, 0.76-2.40]), hydroxychloroquine alone (HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.63-1.85]), or azithromycin alone (HR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.26-1.21]). In logistic models, compared with patients receiving neither drug cardiac arrest was significantly more likely in patients receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin (adjusted OR, 2.13 [95% CI, 1.12-4.05]), but not hydroxychloroquine alone (adjusted OR, 1.91 [95% CI, 0.96-3.81]) or azithromycin alone (adjusted OR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.27-1.56]), . In adjusted logistic regression models, there were no significant differences in the relative likelihood of abnormal electrocardiogram findings. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients hospitalized in metropolitan New York with COVID-19, treatment with hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, or both, compared with neither treatment, was not significantly associated with differences in in-hospital mortality. However, the interpretation of these findings may be limited by the observational design.

Reducing the Risk of Mortality in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease With Pharmacotherapy: A Narrative Review.

In 2020, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) was the fifth leading cause of death in the United States excluding COVID-19, and its mortality burden has been rising since the 1980s. Smoking cessation, long-term oxygen therapy, noninvasive ventilation, and lung volume reduction surgery have had a beneficial effect on mortality; however, until recently, the effects of pharmacologic therapies on all-cause mortality have been unclear. Inhaled pharmacologic treatments for patients with COPD include combinations of long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMAs), long-acting-ß2-agonists (LABAs), and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). The recent IMPACT and ETHOS clinical trials reported mortality benefits with ICS/LAMA/LABA triple therapy compared with LAMA/LABA dual therapy. In IMPACT, fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol therapy significantly reduced the risk of on-/off-treatment all-cause mortality vs umeclidinium/vilanterol (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.99; P=.042). The ETHOS trial found a reduction in the risk of on-/off-treatment all-cause mortality in patients treated with budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol vs glycopyrrolate/formoterol (hazard ratio, 0.51 [0.33 to 0.80]; nominal P=.0035). Both trials included populations of patients with symptomatic COPD at high risk of future exacerbations, and a post hoc analysis of the final retrieved vital status data suggested that the observed mortality benefits are conferred by the ICS component. In conclusion, triple therapy reduces the risk of mortality in patients with symptomatic COPD characterized by moderate or severe airflow obstruction and a recent history of moderate or severe exacerbations. This benefit is likely to be driven by reductions in exacerbations. Future research efforts should focus on improving the long-term prognosis of patients living with COPD.

The impact of recent chemotherapy on immunity in 2 COVID-19 cases with gastrointestinal tumors: A case report.

INTRODUCTION: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a rapidly emerging infectious respiratory disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Currently, more than 100 million cases of COVID-19 have been confirmed worldwide, with over 2.4 million mortalities. The pandemic affects people of all ages but older individuals and those with severe chronic illnesses, including cancer patients, are at higher risk. PATIENT CONCERNS: The impact of cancer treatment on the progression of COVID-19 is unclear. Therefore, we assessed the effects of chemotherapy on COVID-19 outcomes for 2 cancer patients. On January 24, 2020, a level I response to a major public health emergency was initiated in Hubei Province, China, which includes Enshi Autonomous Prefecture that has a population of 4.026 million people. As of April 30, 2020, 252 confirmed cases of COVID-19 and 11 asymptomatic carriers were identified in Enshi. DIAGNOSIS: Among the confirmed cases and asymptomatic carriers, 2 patients were identified who were previously diagnosed with malignant tumors, including one with hepatocellular carcinoma and the other with cardia carcinoma. INTERVENTIONS: These 2 patients were receiving or just completed chemotherapy at the time of their COVID-19 diagnosis. OUTCOMES: Both patients were followed and presented favorable outcomes. The positive outcomes for these 2 patients could be partially explained by their recent chemotherapy that impacted their immune status. Also, their relatively younger ages and lack of comorbidities were likely factors in their successful recovery from COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Anticancer treatment might enhance a patient's ability to respond favorably to COVID-19 infection. However, anticancer treatment is likely to impact immune function differently in different individuals, which can influence disease outcomes.

Tirzepatide versus Semaglutide Once Weekly in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Tirzepatide is a dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist that is under development for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. The efficacy and safety of once-weekly tirzepatide as compared with semaglutide, a selective GLP-1 receptor agonist, are unknown. METHODS: In an open-label, 40-week, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 1879 patients, in a 1:1:1:1 ratio, to receive tirzepatide at a dose of 5 mg, 10 mg, or 15 mg or semaglutide at a dose of 1 mg. At baseline, the mean glycated hemoglobin level was 8.28%, the mean age 56.6 years, and the mean weight 93.7 kg. The primary end point was the change in the glycated hemoglobin level from baseline to 40 weeks. RESULTS: The estimated mean change from baseline in the glycated hemoglobin level was -2.01 percentage points, -2.24 percentage points, and -2.30 percentage points with 5 mg, 10 mg, and 15 mg of tirzepatide, respectively, and -1.86 percentage points with semaglutide; the estimated differences between the 5-mg, 10-mg, and 15-mg tirzepatide groups and the semaglutide group were -0.15 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.28 to -0.03; P = 0.02), -0.39 percentage points (95% CI, -0.51 to -0.26; P<0.001), and -0.45 percentage points (95% CI, -0.57 to -0.32; P<0.001), respectively. Tirzepatide at all doses was noninferior and superior to semaglutide. Reductions in body weight were greater with tirzepatide than with semaglutide (least-squares mean estimated treatment difference, -1.9 kg, -3.6 kg, and -5.5 kg, respectively; P<0.001 for all comparisons). The most common adverse events were gastrointestinal and were primarily mild to moderate in severity in the tirzepatide and semaglutide groups (nausea, 17 to 22% and 18%; diarrhea, 13 to 16% and 12%; and vomiting, 6 to 10% and 8%, respectively). Of the patients who received tirzepatide, hypoglycemia (blood glucose level, <54 mg per deciliter) was reported in 0.6% (5-mg group), 0.2% (10-mg group), and 1.7% (15-mg group); hypoglycemia was reported in 0.4% of those who received semaglutide. Serious adverse events were reported in 5 to 7% of the patients who received tirzepatide and in 3% of those who received semaglutide. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 2 diabetes, tirzepatide was noninferior and superior to semaglutide with respect to the mean change in the glycated hemoglobin level from baseline to 40 weeks. (Funded by Eli Lilly; SURPASS-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03987919.).