Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Cureus ; 16(4): e57597, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38706997

ABSTRACT

A black box warning, signaling potential life-threatening adverse effects of medications or medical devices, is crucial for public and healthcare professional awareness. Comprehending and adhering to these warnings can prevent serious harm. This review aims to elucidate their significance. Data on drugs with black box warnings were collected from the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) official website using the search term 'Boxed warnings' from January 1, 2015, to January 31, 2024. A Microsoft Excel spreadsheet (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, USA) containing black box warnings for this period was downloaded from the FDA's website. Additional parameters, such as drug class and whether the warnings were new or existing, were added to the downloaded spreadsheet. The collected data were organized by year, categorizing new and existing warnings, along with details on the evidence source, system-wise classification, and black box warnings for commonly used drugs, including their clinical significance. Results show that in the past decade, 40% of black box warnings were issued in 2023, followed by 12% in 2022. Most warnings (67%) comprised existing ones with minor revisions while 29% were new. Nine existing warnings were removed during the period. Post-marketing studies predominantly provided evidence for these warnings. Neuropsychiatric concerns like addiction potential (31%), suicidal tendency (7%), and hypersensitivity reactions (12%) were the frequently encountered black box warnings. Black box warnings play a crucial role in highlighting the serious adverse effects of medications. Neuropsychiatric warnings have been frequent over the past decade. Awareness of these warnings is essential to prevent adverse effects and enhance patient care, especially concerning drugs like guaifenesin/hydrocodone bitartrate, zolpidem, and montelukast commonly encountered in clinical practice.

2.
Monoclon Antib Immunodiagn Immunother ; 42(2): 77-94, 2023 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37129306

ABSTRACT

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) had received emergency use authorization for mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) or for prophylaxis against COVID-19, including casirivimab plus imdevimab (C+I), bamlanivimab plus etesevimab (B+E), tixagevimab plus cilgavimab (T+CG), and sotrovimab (S) and bebtelovimab (BEB). This systematic review was done to assess the efficacy and safety of the same. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, medRxiv, bioRxiv, and FDA fact sheets were searched for the studies published between January 2021 and May 2022, and appropriate search terms related to the mentioned mAbs were used for data collection. Review included original research including randomized clinical trials and observational studies published or preprints. Studies included in the review had compared with placebo or standard of care or no treatment or mAbs with each other and also of various doses. Data extraction was done and reviewed the same for both efficacy and safety. Total of 20 studies were included in this review. The rate of hospitalization within 30 days showed ∼2% in comparison to ∼7% with placebo. Significant reduction in viral load was more observed with combination mAbs. Combination therapy showed faster virological cure against the Gamma variant. With C + I as postexposure prophylaxis (PEP), 29.0% of asymptomatic participants developed symptomatic COVID-19. Pre-exposure prophylaxis with T+CG reduced the incidence of infection by 77%. Infusion-related reaction was the most common adverse event (AE). The neutralizing mAbs reduced hospitalization in mild-to-moderate patients with infusion-related reactions as common AE. The response was better in the seronegative patients. Most of these studies were conducted in unvaccinated individuals and against Alpha, Gamma, and Delta variants.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal , COVID-19 , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Antibodies, Viral
3.
Ir J Med Sci ; 192(4): 1665-1678, 2023 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36087236

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Molnupiravir is an oral antiviral drug that received Emergency Use Authorization in three countries for the treatment of mild COVID-19. The aim of this systematic review was to find out the safety and efficacy of Molnupiravir in SARS-COV-2 infections. METHODS: The electronic databases such as PubMed, MedRxiv, BioRxiv, FDA, ClinicalTrials.Gov, ctri.nic.in and Google Scholar were searched for articles from January 2021 to March 2022 using the keywords such as "Molnupiravir", "COVID-19", "Oral antiviral pill", "MK-4482", "EIDD-280", "Efficacy" and "Safety". Details of published, unpublished with interim reports and ongoing studies of Molnupiravir in COVID-19 were retrieved, and a systematic review was performed. RESULTS: A total of 6 articles and 18 ongoing trials data were collected. Out of these, data from 4 published and 2 unpublished with interim reports were extracted. After review of these studies, it was observed that the daily dose of 1600 mg Molnupiravir for 5 days was safe and tolerable with nausea, diarrhea and headache as the common adverse effects. The results also showed significant decrease in time to viral clearance with 800 mg twice daily in mild patients and reduction in the risk of hospitalization or death by 50% in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients. CONCLUSION: Evidence from clinical studies showed that Molnupiravir caused significant reduction in the risk of hospitalization or death in high-risk mild COVID-19 patients. Molnupiravir was also found to be well tolerated and safe without any major adverse events on short-term use. For confirmative use of this drug in mild-to-moderate COVID-19 disease, further studies are required in vaccinated COVID-19 patients and against emerging variants.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Databases, Factual
4.
World J Diabetes ; 13(10): 822-834, 2022 Oct 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36311999

ABSTRACT

Artificial Intelligence is a multidisciplinary field with the aim of building platforms that can make machines act, perceive, reason intelligently and whose goal is to automate activities that presently require human intelligence. From the cornea to the retina, artificial intelligence (AI) is expected to help ophthalmologists diagnose and treat ocular diseases. In ophthalmology, computerized analytics are being viewed as efficient and more objective ways to interpret the series of images and come to a conclusion. AI can be used to diagnose and grade diabetic retinopathy, glaucoma, age-related macular degeneration, cataracts, IOL power calculation, retinopathy of prematurity and keratoconus. This review article intends to discuss various aspects of artificial intelligence in ophthalmology.

5.
Cureus ; 14(12): e32937, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36712728

ABSTRACT

AIM: To determine whether wearing a face mask for more than three to six hours/day leads to the new onset of symptoms or worsening of pre-existing dry eye disease (DED) in healthcare workers (HCWs) of our institute. METHODOLOGY: An observational cross-sectional study, where 114 HCWs using face masks regularly participated voluntarily in the study. A survey with a modified Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire was completed by participants. They were divided into groups based on their sex, age, how long they had been wearing face masks, and whether they had a history of DED. RESULTS: We found that for HCWs who had previously experienced DED and who were under the age of 40, wearing a face mask for more than three to six hours/day could contribute to or worsen symptoms of DED. Also, we observed that the N-95 mask has a higher chance of causing DED than surgical masks. CONCLUSION: Medical professionals need to be aware of any potential dry eye symptoms related to the prolonged use of a face mask. Additional consideration should be given to patients who already have DED. The possible concerns that incorrectly fitted facemasks may cause to the health of their ocular surface should be discussed with patients by ophthalmologists. Future research involving larger populations will shed light on the prevalence and scope of the mask-associated dry eye problem.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...