ABSTRACT
The link between type 2 diabetes (T2D) and the severe outcomes of COVID-19 has raised concerns about the optimal management of patients with T2D. This study aimed to investigate the clinical characteristics and outcomes of T2D patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and explore the potential associations between chronic T2D treatments and adverse outcomes. This was a multicenter prospective cohort study of T2D patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Greece during the third wave of the pandemic (February-June 2021). Among the 354 T2D patients included in this study, 63 (18.6%) died during hospitalization, and 16.4% required ICU admission. The use of DPP4 inhibitors for the chronic management of T2D was associated with an increased risk of in-hospital death (adjusted odds ratio (adj. OR) 2.639, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.148-6.068, p = 0.022), ICU admission (adj. OR = 2.524, 95% CI: 1.217-5.232, p = 0.013), and progression to ARDS (adj. OR = 2.507, 95% CI: 1.278-4.916, p = 0.007). Furthermore, the use of DPP4 inhibitors was significantly associated with an increased risk of thromboembolic events (adjusted OR of 2.249, 95% CI: 1.073-4.713, p = 0.032) during hospitalization. These findings highlight the importance of considering the potential impact of chronic T2D treatment regiments on COVID-19 and the need for further studies to elucidate the underlying mechanisms.
ABSTRACT
Primary non-Hodgkin lymphoma of the bone (PLB) is a rare type of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) that affects the skeletal system with or without regional lymph node involvement. We present the case of a 74-year-old female patient with pain due to multifocal osteolytic lesions. The diagnosis of diffuse large B-cells (non-GCB) phenotype was made by clinical, laboratory, histopathological examination accompanied by an extensive immunohistochemical profile of one of the skeletal lesions.
ABSTRACT
Primary non-Hodgkin lymphoma of the bone (PLB) is a rare type of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) that affects the skeletal system with or without regional lymph node involvement. We present the case of a 74-year-old female patient with pain due to multifocal osteolytic lesions. The diagnosis of diffuse large B-cells (non-GCB) phenotype was made by clinical, laboratory, histopathological examination accompanied by an extensive immunohistochemical profile of one of the skeletal lesions.
Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Aged , Osteolysis/pathology , Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin/pathology , B-LymphocytesABSTRACT
AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of microsomal triglyceride transfer protein inhibitor (lomitapide) in patients with homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 12 homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia patients treated with lipid-lowering drugs ± biweekly lipoprotein apheresis sessions (nine patients), daily lomitapide was added. The lipid profile (total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol) before and after lomitapide treatment was evaluated. The follow-up period with lomitapide treatment was 3-24 months (13.8 ± 7.9). The median baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level was 900 mg/dl (348-1070), after lipid-lowering drugs therapy was 383.5 mg/dl (214-866) and after lipid-lowering drugs + time-averaged level was 288 mg/dl (183.7-716.6). The addition of lomitapide lowered low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels further by 56.8% compared to lipid-lowering drugs alone (mean reduction 262, 95% confidence interval (105.5-418.7), p = 0.005) and by 54% (mean reduction 182.9, 95% confidence interval (-342 - -23), p = 0.031) comparing to lipid-lowering drugs + lipoprotein apheresis (time-averaged level). The time-averaged level of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in lipid-lowering drugs + lipoprotein apheresis patients compared with lipid-lowering drugs + lomitapide was 54% in favour of lomitapide (p = 0.031). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with lomitapide in homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia patients has a beneficial effect with a constant decrease of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol by 57% compared with classical lipid-lowering therapy and by 54% compared with classical lipid-lowering therapy and time-averaged level of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol.
