Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
BMJ Glob Health ; 9(1)2024 01 24.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38267078

RESUMO

Less than 1% of all clinical trials are conducted in Africa. In 2019, only six of 26 oncology clinical trials conducted in Africa were conducted in countries with subjects of African ancestry. There are multiple barriers that hinder the conduct of cancer clinical trials in Africa. Time to trial activation (TTA) is the administrative and regulatory process required before a study can be activated-an important metric and often a major barrier for site selection. In Kenya, TTA involves review by Institutional Review Board (IRB), Pharmacy and Poisons Board, National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation and Ministry of Health, all in a sequential fashion. We performed a prospective review of TTA for all clinical trials initiated and began enrolment at the Aga Khan University-Clinical Research Unit between June 2020 and November 2022. TTA was defined as total time from submission of study documents (to regulatory bodies) to site activation by the sponsor. A total of 12 studies were submitted for regulatory review. Eleven (nine industry sponsored and two investigator initiated) were approved for activation. Three were COVID-19-related studies and eight were non-COVID-19-related studies. Mean TTA for COVID-related studies was 80 days (range 40-120). Mean TTA for non-COVID-related studies was 259 days (range 190-399). This TTA difference was statistically significant (p=0.02). TTA remains a significant barrier to the efficient regulatory approval of and subsequent conduct of clinical trials in Africa. COVID-19 pandemic revealed that parallel processing and expedited review of clinical trials allows efficient TTA without compromising human subject safety or data integrity. These lessons need to be applied to all clinical trials in order for African sites to become competitive and contribute data from African patients to global knowledge.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Assistência Farmacêutica , Humanos , Pandemias , Estudos Prospectivos , Quênia
2.
PLoS One ; 17(7): e0270594, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35776736

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Low dose radiation therapy (LDRT) has been used for non-malignant conditions since early 1900s based on the ability of single fractions between 50-150 cGy to inhibit cellular proliferation. Given scarcity of resources, poor access to vaccines and medical therapies within low and middle income countries, there is an urgent need to identify other cost-effective alternatives in management of COVID-19 pneumonia. We conducted a pilot phase Ib/II investigator-initiated clinical trial to assess the safety, feasibility, and toxicity of LDRT in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia at the Aga Khan University Hospital in Nairobi, Kenya. Additionally, we also assessed clinical benefit in terms of improvement in oxygenation at day 3 following LDRT and the ability to avoid mechanical ventilation at day 7 post LDRT. METHODS: Patients with both polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and high-resolution computer tomogram (HRCT) confirmed severe COVID-19 pneumonia, not improving on conventional therapy including Dexamethasone and with increasing oxygen requirement were enrolled in the study. Patients on mechanical ventilation were excluded. Eligible patients received a single 100cGy fraction to the whole lung. In the absence of any dose limiting toxicity the study proposed to treat a total of 10 patients. The primary endpoints were to assess the safety/feasibility, and toxicity within the first 24 hours post LDRT. The secondary endpoints were to assess efficacy of LDRT at Day 3, 7, 14 and 28 post LDRT. RESULTS: Ten patients were treated with LDRT. All (100%) of patients were able to complete LDRT without treatment related SAE within the first 24 hours post treatment. None of the patients treated with LDRT experienced any acute toxicity as defined by change in clinical and respiratory status at 24hr following LDRT. Majority (90%) of patients avoided mechanical ventilation within 7 days of LDRT. Four patients (40%) demonstrated at least 25% improvement in oxygen requirements within 3 days. Six patients (60%) were discharged and remained off oxygen, whereas four progressed and died (1 due to sepsis and 3 in cytokine storm). Median time to discharge (n = 6) was 16.5 days and median time to death (n = 4) was 11.0 days. Patients who ultimately died showed elevated inflammatory markers including Ferritin, CRP and D-dimers as compared to those who were discharged alive. CONCLUSION: LDRT was feasible, safe and shows promise in the management of severe COVID-19 pneumonia including in patients progressing on conventional systemic treatment. Additional phase II trials are warranted to identify patients most likely to benefit from LDRT.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Humanos , Quênia , Pulmão/diagnóstico por imagem , Oxigênio/uso terapêutico , Tórax
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...