Use of sodium dichloroacetate for cancer treatment: a scoping review.

In recent years, drug repurposing (DR) has gained significant attention as a promising strategy for identifying new therapeutic uses of existing drugs. One potential candidate for DR in cancer treatment is sodium dichloroacetate (DCA), which has been shown to alter tumor metabolism and decrease apoptosis resistance in cancer cells. In this paper, we present a scoping review of the use of DCA for cancer treatment in adult patients, aiming to identify key research gaps in this area. This scoping review aims to explore the existing scientific literature to provide an overview of the use of DCA (any dose, frequency, or route of administration) in adults with cancer. A comprehensive literature search of the medical databases MEDLINE/PubMed, LILACS, EPISTEMONIKOS, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials was performed. We included publications reporting on adult patients diagnosed with any type of cancer treated with sodium dichloroacetate in combination or not with other drugs. All types of study design were included. A total of 12 articles were included, most of them were case reports. We found a high degree of heterogeneity between them. The most frequent adverse events in the evaluated studies were asthenia, reversible toxicity, and an increase in liver enzymes. Effectiveness was difficult to evaluate. We conclude that there is insufficient evidence to affirm that treatment with DCA in cancer patients is effective or is safe.

El reposicionamiento de fármacos (RF) es un enfoque terapéutico reciente que se presenta como una estrategia prometedora para identificar nuevos usos terapéuticos de fármacos existentes. Un candidato potencial para RF en el tratamiento del cáncer es el dicloroacetato de sodio (DCA), el cual ha mostrado la capacidad de alterar el metabolismo tumoral y disminuir la resistencia a la apoptosis de células tumorales. La presente es una revisión (scoping review) del uso del DCA para el tratamiento del cáncer en pacientes adultos, que tiene como objetivo identificar brechas de investigación claves en esta área. Esta revisión pretende explorar la literatura científica existente, para proporcionar una visión general del uso del DCA (cualquier dosis, frecuencia o vía de administración) en individuos adultos con cáncer. Se llevó a cabo una búsqueda exhaustiva de la literatura en las bases médicas de datos MEDLINE/PubMed, LILACS, EPISTEMONIKOS, the Cochrane Library y ClinicalTrials. Se incluyeron publicaciones que informaban sobre pacientes adultos diagnosticados con cualquier tipo de cáncer, tratados con DCA, en combinación o no con otros fármacos. Dichos estudios presentaban distintos tipos de diseño. Se incluyó un total de 12 artículos, la mayoría de los cuales fueron reportes de casos. Se encontró un alto grado de heterogeneidad entre los mismos. Los eventos adversos más frecuentes fueron astenia, toxicidad reversible y aumento de las enzimas hepáticas, siendo la efectividad terapéutica difícil de evaluar. Concluimos que existe evidencia insuficiente para afirmar que el tratamiento con DCA en pacientes con cáncer es efectivo y/o seguro.

Agreement Between Viscoelastic Coagulation Monitor (VCM), TEG 5000, and Coagulation Tests in Critically Ill Patients: A Multicenter Study.

The performance of viscoelastic coagulation monitor (VCM) compared with TEG 5000 (TEG) is unknown. In this multicenter study, the authors evaluated the agreement among VCM/TEG parameters and their relationship with standard coagulation tests in critically ill patients. Viscoelastic coagulation monitor, TEG, and laboratory samples were analyzed simultaneously. Viscoelastic coagulation monitor/TEG agreement was computed by Bland and Altman's plots, association with laboratory parameters was studied with Spearman's correlation coefficient and random-intercept linear models. One-hundred and twenty-seven patients enrolled, 320 paired observations: 210 (65.6%) under unfractioned heparin (UFH), 94 (29.4%) under low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), 16 (5.0%) no heparin. Under UFH prolonged clot formation times and reduced the amplitude of viscoelastic tracings on both devices, especially on TEG. The type of heparin affected the agreement between VCM/TEG homolog parameters. Reaction time (TEG-R) resulted 23.1 min longer than the homolog clotting time (VCM-CT) under UFH; maximum amplitude (TEG-MA) resulted 29.5 mm higher than maximum clot firmness (VCM-MCF) under LMWH. Weak correlation was observed between VCM-CT/TEG-R and activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT)/anti-Xa; no correlation was found between VCM-alpha/TEG-angle and fibrinogen concentration. Viscoelastic coagulation monitor-MCF showed strong (LWMH) to moderate (UFH) correlation with platelet count, while TEG-MA only showed lower correlation. Viscoelastic coagulation monitor and TEG are differently affected by heparin. The platelet count is well represented by VCM-MCF even during UFH administration.