A Randomized Control Trial of Dexketoprofen/Vitamin B (Thiamine, Pyridoxine and Cyanocobalamin) Fixed-Dose Combination in Post-Traumatic Grade I-II Cervical Sprains.

BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal disorders are an important cause of work absence. Clinical practice guidelines recommend nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for grade I-II cervical sprains. The combination of thiamine + pyridoxine + cyanocobalamin vitamins has been used, alone and in combination with NSAIDs, for pain and inflammation in musculoskeletal disorders. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to demonstrate the analgesic synergy of dexketoprofen, and the combination of vitamins thiamine + pyridoxine + cyanocobalamin in a fixed-dose combination (FDC) for the treatment of acute pain caused by grade I-II cervical sprains. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, prospective, randomized, double-blind, phase IIIb clinical study comparing two treatment groups: (1) dexketoprofen 25 mg/vitamin B (thiamine 100 mg, pyridoxine 50 mg and cyanocobalamin 0.50 mg) in an FDC (two or more active ingredients combined in a single dosage form) versus (2) dexketoprofen 25 mg monotherapy (single drug to treat a particular disease), one capsule or tablet orally, every 8 h for 7 days. Final mean, average change, and percentage change in pain perception (measured using a visual analogue scale [VAS]) were compared with baseline between groups. A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Analyses were conducted using SPSS software, v.29.0. RESULTS: A statistically significant reduction in pain intensity was observed from the third day of treatment with the FDC compared with monotherapy (- 3.1 ± - 1.5 and - 2.6 ± - 1.1 cm, respectively) measured using the VAS (p = 0.011). Regarding the degree of disability, using the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ), statistical difference was observed for the final measurement (7.5%, interquartile range [IQR] 2.5, 10.5; vs. 7.9%, IQR 5.0, 13.8; p = 0.028). A lower proportion of adverse events was reported when using the FDC. CONCLUSIONS: The FDC of dexketoprofen/thiamine + pyridoxine + cyanocobalamin vitamins demonstrated superior efficacy and a better safety profile compared with dexketoprofen monotherapy for pain treatment in patients with grade I-II cervical sprains. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT05001555, registered 29 July 2021 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05001555 ).

Real-World Evidence Evaluation on the Lipid Profile, Therapeutic Goals, and Safety of the Fixed-Dose Combination of Rosuvastatin/Ezetimibe (Trezete®) in Dyslipidemia Patients.

Introduction: Cardiovascular diseases are the leading cause of death worldwide. The combination of statins and cholesterol-absorption inhibitors promotes the decrease in risk factors, such as high concentrations of LDL (low-density lipoproteins). The aim of the study was to evaluate changes in the lipid profile and the effect on therapeutic goals, as well as the safety of dyslipidemia patients treated with Rosuvastatin/Ezetimibe (Trezete®). Materials and Methods: A real-world evidence study was conducted with retrospective data collection through a review of clinical records from dyslipidemia patients treated with Trezete® in routine medical practice. Clinical records included results of biochemical markers before treatment and at least one follow up between weeks 8 and 16. Results: The study included 103 patients' clinical records (55.4% men) with a mean age of 56.0 ± 13.0 years. More than 57% of the patients had mixed dyslipidemia and a median disease progression of 3.1 (IQR, 1.5; 9.1) years. Regarding LDL concentrations, 72.8% of the patients achieved therapeutic goals according to cardiovascular risk (CVR), which was statistically significant. Similarly, 94.1% achieved goals for total cholesterol (<200 mg/dL) and 56.0% for triglycerides (<150 mg/dL), a p value <0.001. No cardiovascular events were observed. Conclusion: Trezete® shows an important clinical impact on CVR-related target markers during the treatment of dyslipidemia patients. It is relevant to mention that a significant percentage of patients achieved therapeutic goals during the first months of treatment. Fixed-dose combination therapy has shown to be as safe as monotherapy treatment. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04862962.

Treatment with metformin glycinate reduces SARS-CoV-2 viral load: An in vitro model and randomized, double-blind, Phase IIb clinical trial.

The health crisis caused by the new coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 highlights the need to identify new treatment strategies for this viral infection. During the past year, over 400 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) treatment patents have been registered; nevertheless, the presence of new virus variants has triggered more severe disease presentations and reduced treatment effectiveness, highlighting the need for new treatment options for the COVID-19. This study evaluates the Metformin Glycinate (MG) effect on the SARS-CoV-2 in vitro and in vivo viral load. The in vitro study was conducted in a model of Vero E6 cells, while the in vivo study was an adaptive, two-armed, randomized, prospective, longitudinal, double-blind, multicentric, and phase IIb clinical trial. Our in vitro results revealed that MG effectively inhibits viral replication after 48 h of exposure to the drug, with no cytotoxic effect in doses up to 100 µM. The effect of the MG was also tested against three variants of interest (alpha, delta, and epsilon), showing increased survival rates in cells treated with MG. These results are aligned with our clinical data, which indicates that MG treatment reduces SARS-CoV2-infected patients´ viral load in just 3.3 days and supplementary oxygen requirements compared with the control group. We expect our results can guide efforts to position MG as a therapeutic option for COVID-19 patients.

Comparative Bioavailability of Metformin Hydrochloride Oral Solution Versus Metformin Hydrochloride Tablets in Fasting Mexican Healthy Volunteers.

INTRODUCTION: Metformin tablets may be challenging to swallow not only for those patients with dysphagia but also for children and the elderly. A metformin solution was developed for easier administration and flexible dose adjustment mantained with the same bioavailability of tablets. The objective of this study was to assess the single-dose oral bioavailability of metformin hydrochloride administered as an oral solution (500 mg/5 mL) compared with metformin hydrochloride 500 mg tablets in fasting Mexican healthy volunteers. METHODS: A randomized, single dose, two-period, two-sequence, crossover study design with a 7-day washout interval was conducted. Subjects were randomly assigned to receive a single dose of 500 mg metformin hydrochloride, either as an oral solution (test drug) or as a tablet (reference drug), after 10 h of fasting. Plasma samples (16) were collected over a 16-h period after drug administration. Bioequivalence was declared when the ratio for the 90% confidence intervals (CI) of the difference in the means of the log-transformed area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to the last observed concentration time (AUC0-t), the area under the concentration-time curve extrapolated to infinite time (AUC0-∞), and the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) of the two products were within 0.80 and 1.25 interval. Plasma concentrations were analyzed using reverse phase chromatography by tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). Safety and tolerability of metformin were also assessed in all subjects. RESULTS: 24 subjects were enrolled and completed the study (15 female and 9 male). Test and reference metformin hydrochloride were bioequivalent during the extent of exposure since AUC0-t and Cmax 90% CIs corresponded to 89.77-101.08% and 89.63-102.48%, respectively, both being within the pre-specified acceptance range criteria (80-125%). There were two adverse events (AE) with the reference formulation that were not related to the study drug. CONCLUSIONS: Bioequivalence in healthy volunteers in fasting conditions of the two metformin hydrochloride formulations (oral solution and tablets) was established, being the difference in means of AUC0-t, AUC0-∞ and Cmax within the acceptance range (80-125%). Oral solution formulation could offer the advantages of allowing adjusted doses and easier swallowing for every patient. Plain language summary is available for this article. TRIAL REGISTRATION: National Clinical Trials Registry (RNEC by its Spanish acronym), BD METF-Sil No. 86-15. Mexican Medicine Agency (COFEPRIS) Registry: 153300410B0368. FUNDING: Laboratorios Silanes, S.A. de C.V.

[Cost-effectiveness in the detection of influenza H1N1: clinical data versus rapid tests]. / Costo-efectividad en la detección de influenza H1N1: datos clínicos versus pruebas rápidas.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the performance of clinical data and the rapid influenza diagnostic test (RIDT) in diagnosing influenza H1N1, and analyze the cost-benefit of using this diagnostic tool. METHODS: The RIDT was used for patients who came to four hospitals in Mexico City with an influenza-like illness (ILI) in October and November 2009. The diagnostic performance of the ILI clinical data and the RIDT was compared to that of the real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) test. The rRT-PCR test was conducted in a reference laboratory and blinded to the results of the RIDT. An economic evaluation also was conducted to estimate the budgetary impact of using the RIDT. RESULTS: The study included 78 patients, 39 of whom tested positive for influenza H1N1 and 6 tested positive for seasonal influenza A, according to the results of the rRT-PCR. The ILI clinical data yielded a sensitivity of 96% and specificity of 21%; the RIDT yielded a sensitivity of 76% and specificity of 82%; and the ILI clinical data and RIDT together yielded a sensitivity of 96% and specificity of 100%. The positive likelihood quotient for ILI-headaches was 31.5 and that of ILI-odynophagia, 330. The use of RIDT yielded savings of US$12.6 per each suspected case. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the RIDT to aid in the diagnosis of influenza H1N1 increases certainty and lowers the average cost per suspected and infected patient.

Costo-efectividad en la detección de influenza H1N1: datos clínicos versus pruebas rápidas / Cost-effectiveness in the detection of influenza H1N1: clinical data versus rapid tests

OBJETIVO: Evaluar el desempeño de los datos clínicos y la prueba rápida (PR) en el diagnóstico de influenza H1N1, y analizar el costo-beneficio que representa el uso de esta herramienta diagnóstica. MÉTODOS: Se aplicó la PR a pacientes que acudieron a cuatro hospitales en la ciudad de México con sintomatología similar a influenza (SSI) durante el período octubre y noviembre de 2009. Se comparó el desempeño diagnóstico de la SSI más la PR contra el de la reacción en cadena de la polimerasa en transcripción reversa en tiempo real (rRT-PCR). La rRT-PCR fue procesada en un laboratorio de referencia y cegado al resultado de la PR. Además, se llevó a cabo una evaluación económica a partir de la cual se estimó el impacto presupuestal relacionado con la utilización de la PR RESULTADOS: Se incluyó a 78 pacientes, de los cuales 39 fueron positivos para influenza H1N1 y 6 para influenza A estacional, de acuerdo al resultado de la rRT-PCR. La SSI mostró una sensibilidad de 96 por ciento y una especificidad de 21 por ciento, la PR de 76 por ciento y 82 por ciento y el conjunto de SSI más PR de 96 por ciento y 100 por ciento, respectivamente. El Cociente de Verosimilitud positivo de la SSI-cefalea fue de 31,5 y el de SSI-odinofagia fue de 330. El uso de PR mostró un ahorro de US$ 12,6 por cada caso sospechoso. CONCLUSIONES: El uso de la PR como auxiliar en el diagnóstico de influenza H1N1 incrementa la certeza y reduce el costo promedio por paciente sospechoso e infectado.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the performance of clinical data and the rapid influenza diagnostic test (RIDT) in diagnosing influenza H1N1, and analyze the cost-benefit of using this diagnostic tool. METHODS: The RIDT was used for patients who came to four hospitals in Mexico City with an influenza-like illness (ILI) in October and November 2009. The diagnostic performance of the ILI clinical data and the RIDT was compared to that of the real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) test. The rRT-PCR test was conducted in a reference laboratory and blinded to the results of the RIDT. An economic evaluation also was conducted to estimate the budgetary impact of using the RIDT. RESULTS: The study included 78 patients, 39 of whom tested positive for influenza H1N1 and 6 tested positive for seasonal influenza A, according to the results of the rRT-PCR. The ILI clinical data yielded a sensitivity of 96 percent and specificity of 21 percent; the RIDT yielded a sensitivity of 76 percent and specificity of 82 percent; and the ILI clinical data and RIDT together yielded a sensitivity of 96 percent and specificity of 100 percent. The positive likelihood quotient for ILI-headaches was 31.5 and that of ILI-odynophagia, 330. The use of RIDT yielded savings of US$12.6 per each suspected case. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the RIDT to aid in the diagnosis of influenza H1N1 increases certainty and lowers the average cost per suspected and infected patient.