RESUMO
Adherence to vaccination recommendations is a challenge for national immunization programs. We quantified adherence to COVID-19 vaccination recommendations in people with substance use disorders (SUDs) attending an outpatient addiction center in Rome, Italy; we investigated the determinants of adherence, and also analyzed patient risk perception and compliance with preventive measures. A multivariable logistic regression model identified predictors of adherence to vaccination recommendations, with statistical validity tested by estimating adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). From December 2021 to January 2022, 200 SUD patients completed a questionnaire, 80% of whom reported being vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 (minimum one dose). Negative predictors of vaccine uptake included being non-Italian (aOR: 0.36, 95% CI: 0.13-0.97), having coexisting comorbidities (aOR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.13-0.95), and previous use of heroin (aOR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.08-0.71). No difference was found for cocaine use, demographic characteristics, previous COVID-19 infection, methadone therapy, or compliance with preventive measures. Major reasons for non-adherence to vaccination recommendations were fear of side effects, insufficient recognition of the importance of vaccination, bureaucratic issues, and lack of trust in the authorities. Given their vulnerability, additional efforts are needed to facilitate access to vaccination for people with SUDs, and to limit disinformation around vaccines..
RESUMO
BACKGROUND/AIM: We conducted a retrospective analysis in our center (Umberto I Polyclinic) in collaboration with Campus Biomedico Polyclinic to assess the results of the REFLECT study, which was the first study that demonstrated the non-inferiority of Lenvatinib to Sorafenib. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified 21 patients affected by advanced hepatocellular carcinoma during the last 3 years who were treated in our centers. They were subdivided according to the treatment administered (Lenvatinib or Sorafenib). Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated, and subgroups were compared using the log-rank test. Specific predictive and prognostic factors were identified. The safety profile of the two drugs and the collateral effects were evaluated. RESULTS: The OS in patients in the Lenvatinib arm was 19 (months and 12.5 months in the Sorafenib arm. PFS in patients in the Lenvatinib arm was 6 months and 2.5 months in the Sorafenib arm. OS and PFS in patients treated with Lenvatinib were higher in any subcategory analyzed whereas no positive predictors of response to Sorafenib were found. Based on data from literature, the albumin bilirubin index (ALBI) grade was found to be a key prognostic factor. Patients treated with Sorafenib had more adverse events than those treated with Lenvatinib (100% versus 81.8%, respectively). Patients treated with Sorafenib had more frequently hand-foot syndromes, diarrhea, and nausea whereas patients treated with Lenvatinib commonly had hypertension, proteinuria, and weight loss. CONCLUSION: Lenvatinib was found to be better than Sorafenib in terms of both survival and toxicity, in advanced hepatic cell carcinoma patients.
