Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Transpl Infect Dis ; 24(5): e13891, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35752947

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial resistance constitutes a major public health issue that leads to poor outcomes and increased costs associated with healthcare. Solid organ transplant recipients are more prone due to prolonged exposure to antimicrobials. METHODS: We reviewed existing programs in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and pattern of drug resistance, and the extent of transplant medicine in the kingdom through published articles in databases and official documents from health authorities. RESULTS: A national committee for antimicrobial resistance (AMR) was established to set the guidelines required for an antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP), especially when there is a high prevalence of AMR. A survey noted that ASPs are implemented in only 26% of Saudi Ministry of Health hospitals. Factors affecting the implementation of ASPs in Saudi hospitals included a lack of necessary staff resources and specific ASP staff/teams to advocate adopting ASP in the organizations. Specific attention should be given to transplant patients as transplantations are expected to increase in the next few years. No antimicrobial stewardship programs are currently specifically tailored to transplant centers. CONCLUSION: The current healthcare system transformation in Saudi Arabia should take into consideration the urgent need for effective ASP that might help face the increasing trends in the multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) prevalence rate.


Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents , Organ Transplantation , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Health Facilities , Hospitals , Humans , Organ Transplantation/adverse effects , Saudi Arabia/epidemiology
2.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 28(4): 602-608, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35026375

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether favipiravir reduces the time to viral clearance as documented by negative RT-PCR results for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in mild cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) compared to placebo. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blinded, multicentre, and placebo-controlled trial, adults with PCR-confirmed mild COVID-19 were recruited in an outpatient setting at seven medical facilities across Saudi Arabia. Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either favipiravir 1800 mg by mouth twice daily on day 1 followed by 800 mg twice daily (n = 112) or a matching placebo (n = 119) for a total of 5 to 7 days. The primary outcome was the effect of favipiravir on reducing the time to viral clearance (by PCR test) within 15 days of starting the treatment compared to the placebo group. The trial included the following secondary outcomes: symptom resolution, hospitalization, intensive care unit admissions, adverse events, and 28-day mortality. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-one patients were randomized and began the study (median age, 37 years; interquartile range (IQR): 32-44 years; 155 [67%] male), and 112 (48.5%) were assigned to the treatment group and 119 (51.5%) into the placebo group. The data and safety monitoring board recommended stopping enrolment because of futility at the interim analysis. The median time to viral clearance was 10 days (IQR: 6-12 days) in the favipiravir group and 8 days (IQR: 6-12 days) in the placebo group, with a hazard ratio of 0.87 for the favipiravir group (95% CI 0.571-1.326; p = 0.51). The median time to clinical recovery was 7 days (IQR: 4-11 days) in the favipiravir group and 7 days (IQR: 5-10 days) in the placebo group. There was no difference between the two groups in the secondary outcome of hospital admission. There were no drug-related severe adverse events. CONCLUSION: In this clinical trial, favipiravir therapy in mild COVID-19 patients did not reduce the time to viral clearance within 15 days of starting the treatment.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Adult , Amides/therapeutic use , Double-Blind Method , Humans , Male , Pyrazines/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome
3.
Lancet Microbe ; 3(1): e11-e20, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34751259

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: ChAdOx1-vectored vaccine candidates against several pathogens have been developed and tested in clinical trials and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has now been licensed for emergency use for COVID-19. We assessed the safety and immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 MERS vaccine in a phase 1b trial in healthy Middle Eastern adults. METHOD: MERS002 is an open-label, non-randomised, dose-escalation, phase 1b trial. Healthy Middle Eastern adults aged 18-50 years were included in the study. ChAdOx1 MERS was administered as a single intramuscular injection into the deltoid muscle of the non-dominant arm at three different dose groups: 5·0 × 109 viral particles in a low-dose group, 2·5 × 1010 viral particles in an intermediate-dose group, and 5·0 × 1010 viral particles in a high-dose group. The primary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability of ChAdOx1 MERS, measured by the occurrence of solicited and unsolicited adverse events after vaccination for up to 28 days and occurrence of serious adverse events up to 6 months. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04170829. FINDINGS: Between Dec 17, 2019, and June 1, 2020, 24 participants were enrolled (six to the low-dose, nine to the intermediate-dose, and nine to the high-dose group) and received a dose; 23 were available for follow-up at 6 months. The one dose of ChAdOx1 MERS vaccine was well tolerated with no serious adverse event reported during the 6 months of follow-up. Most adverse events were mild (67, 74%) and moderate (17, 19%). Six (7%) severe adverse events were reported by two participants in the intermediate-dose group (two feverish, two headache, one joint pain, and one muscle pain). Pain at the injection site was the most common local and overall adverse event, reported by 15 (63%) of the 24 participants. The most common systemic adverse event was headache, reported by 14 (58%), followed by muscle pain reported by 13 (54%). The vaccine induced both antibody and T cell immune responses in all volunteers; antibodies peaked at day 28 and T cell responses peaked at day 14; and continued until the end of follow-up at 6 months. INTERPRETATION: The acceptable safety and immunogenicity data from this phase 1b trial of ChAdOx1 MERS vaccine candidate in Healthy Middle Eastern adults, combined with previous safety and immunogenicity data from a trial in the UK, support selecting the ChAdOx1 MERS vaccine for advancement into phase 2 clinical evaluation. FUNDING: UK Department of Health and Social Care, using UK Aid funding, managed by the UK National Institute for Health Research; and King Abdullah International Medical Research Center.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/prevention & control , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Headache , Humans , Immunogenicity, Vaccine , Myalgia , Vaccines, DNA , Viral Vaccines
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...