Treatment of patients with Schistosomiasis mansoni: a double blind clinical trial comparing praziquantel with oxamniquine

A double-blind clinical trial involving 120 patients with chronic schistosomiasis was carried out to compare the tolerability and efficacy of praziquantel and oxamniquine. The patients were randomly allocated into two groups. One was treated with praziquantel, 55 mg/kg of body weight CBWT), and the other one with oxamniquine, 15mg/kg bwt, administered in a single oral dose. The diagnosis and the parasitological follow-up was based on stool examinations by quantitative Kato-Katz method and on rectal biopsies. Side-effects — mainly dizziness, sleepness, abdominal distress, headache, nausea and diarrhea — were observed in 87% of the cases. Their incidence, intensity and duration were similar for both drugs but abdominal pain was significantly more frequent after praziquantel intake and severe dizziness was more commonly reported after oxamniquine. A significant increase of alanine-aminotransferase and y-glutamyltransferase was found with the latter drug and of total bilirubin with the former one. A total of 48 patients treated with praziquantel and 46 with oxamniquine completed with negative findings the required three post-treatment parasitological controls — three slides of each stool sample on the first, third and sixth month. The achieved cure rates were 79.2% and 84.8%, respectively, a difference without statistical significance. The non-cured cases showed a mean reduction in the number of eggs per gram of feces of 93.5% after praziquantel and of 84.1% after oxamniquine. This diference also was not significant. Five patients retreated with praziquantel were cured but only one out of three treated a second time with oxamniquine. These findings show that both drugs — despite their different chemical structures, pharmacological properties and mechanisms-of-action — induce similar side-effects as well as a comparable therapeutical efficacy, in agreement with the results reported from analogous investigations.

Effectiveness of the Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant for Treatment of Patients with Diabetic Macular Oedema

Diabetic macular oedema (DMO) is a leading cause of vision loss in the working-age population worldwide. Corticosteroid drugs have been demonstrated to inhibit the expression of both the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) gene and other anti-inflammatory mediators, such as prostaglandins. Triamcinolone, fluocinolone and dexamethasone are the main steroids that have been studied for the treatment of macular oedema. Over the last few years, several studies have suggested an important role for dexamethasone in the management of DMO. The dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX implant) (Ozurdex®; Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA) is a novel approach approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and by the EU for the intravitreal treatment of macular oedema after branch or central retinal vein occlusion, and for the treatment of non-infectious uveitis affecting the posterior segment of the eye. We reviewed manuscripts that had investigated the pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety of the DEX implant regarding DMO treatment.

Malaria in humait a county, state of Amazonas, Brazil. XIX - evaluation of clindamycin for the treatment of patients with Plasmodium falciparum infection

A total of 207 patients with malaria caused by Plasmodium falciparum were submitted to 5 different treatment schedules with clindamycin from 1981 to 1984: A - 89 patients were treated intravenously and orally, or intramuscularly and orally with 20 mg/kg/day divided into two daily applications for 5 to 7 days; B-40 patients were treated orally with 20 mg/kg/day divided into two daily doses for 5 to 7 days; C-27 patients were treated with 20 mg/kg/day intravenously or orally divided into two daily applications for 3 days; D-16 patients were treated orally and/or intravenously with a single daily dose of 20 to 40 mg/kg/day for 5 to 7 days; E-35 patients were treated orally with 5 mg/kg/day divided into two doses for 5 days. Patients were examined daily during treatment and reexamined on the 7th, 24th, 21st, 28th and 35th day both clinically and parasitologically (blood test). Eighty three (40.1%) had moderate or severe malaria, and 97 (46.8%) had shown resistance to chloroquine or to the combination ofsulfadoxin and pyrimethamine. The proportion of cured patients was higher than 95% among patients submitted to schedules A and B. Side effects were only occasional and of low intensity. Three deaths occurred (1.4%), two of them involving patients whose signs and symptoms were already very severe when treatment was started. Thus, clindamycin proved to be very useful in the treatment of patients with malaria caused by Plasmodium falciparum and we recommend schedule A for moderate and severe cases and Bfor initial cases.

Evaluation of inadequate anti-retroviral treatment in patients with HIV/AIDS

INTRODUCTION: Since the emergence of antiretroviral therapy, the survival of patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus has increased. Non-adherence to this therapy is directly related to treatment failure, which allows the emergence of resistant viral strains. METHODS: A retrospective descriptive study of the antiretroviral dispensing records of 229 patients from the Center for Health Care, University Hospital, Federal University of Juiz de Fora, Brazil, was conducted between January and December 2009. RESULTS: The study aimed to evaluate patient compliance and determine if there was an association between non-adherence and the therapy. Among these patients, 63.8% were men with an average age of 44.0 ± 9.9 years. The most used treatment was a combination of 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors with 1 non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (55.5%) or with 2 protease inhibitors (28.8%). It was found that patients taking lopinavir/ritonavir with zidovudine and lamivudine had a greater frequency of inadequate treatment than those taking atazanavir with zidovudine and lamivudine (85% and 83.3%, respectively). Moreover, when the combination of zidovudine/ lamivudine was used, the patients were less compliant (χ2 = 4.468, 1 degree of freedom, p = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients failed to correctly adhere to their treatment; therefore, it is necessary to implement strategies that lead to improved compliance, thus ensuring therapeutic efficacy and increased patient survival.

Clinical Profile, Predictors of Mortality, and Treatment of Patients after Myocardial Infarction, in an Academic Medical Center Hospital

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical profiles, predictors of 30-day mortality, and the adherence to international recommendations for the treatment of myocardial infarction in an academic medical center hospital. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 172 patients with acute myocardial infarction, admitted in the intensive care unit from January 1992 to December 1997. RESULTS: Most patients were male (68%), white (97%), and over 60 years old (59%). The main risk factor for coronary atherosclerotic disease was systemic blood hypertension (63%). Among all the variables studied, reperfusion therapy, smoking, hypertension, cardiogenic shock, and age were the predictors of 30-day mortality. Most commonly used medications were: acetylsalicylic acid (71%), nitrates (61%), diuretics (51%), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (46%), thrombolytic therapy (39%), and beta-blockers (35%). CONCLUSION: The absence of reperfusion therapy, smoking status, hypertension, cardiogenic shock, and advanced age are predictors of 30-day mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction. In addition, some medications that are undoubtedly beneficial have been under-used after acute myocardial infarction.

Vaniprevir with pegylated interferon alpha-2a and ribavirin in treatment-naïve patients with chronic hepatitis C: a randomized phase II study.

Vaniprevir (MK-7009) is a macrocyclic hepatitis C virus (HCV) nonstructural protein 3/4A protease inhibitor. The aim of the present phase II study was to examine virologic response rates with vaniprevir in combination with pegylated interferon alpha-2a (Peg-IFN-α-2a) plus ribavirin (RBV). In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study, treatment-naïve patients with HCV genotype 1 infection (n = 94) were randomized to receive open-label Peg-IFN-α-2a (180 μg/week) and RBV (1,000-1,200 mg/day) in combination with blinded placebo or vaniprevir (300 mg twice-daily [BID], 600 mg BID, 600 mg once-daily [QD], or 800 mg QD) for 28 days, then open-label Peg-IFN-α-2a and RBV for an additional 44 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was rapid viral response (RVR), defined as undetectable plasma HCV RNA at week 4. Across all doses, vaniprevir was associated with a rapid two-phase decline in viral load, with HCV RNA levels approximately 3 log(10) IU/mL lower in vaniprevir-treated patients, compared to placebo recipients. Rates of RVR were significantly higher in each of the vaniprevir dose groups, compared to the control regimen (68.8%-83.3% versus 5.6%; P < 0.001 for all comparisons). There were numerically higher, but not statistically significant, early and sustained virologic response rates with vaniprevir, as compared to placebo. Resistance profile was predictable, with variants at R155 and D168 detected in a small number of patients. No relationship between interleukin-28B genotype and treatment outcomes was demonstrated in this study. The incidence of adverse events was generally comparable between vaniprevir and placebo recipients; however, vomiting appeared to be more common at higher vaniprevir doses. CONCLUSION: Vaniprevir is a potent HCV protease inhibitor with a predictable resistance profile and favorable safety profile that is suitable for QD or BID administration.

Reasons why emergency department providers do not rely on the pneumonia severity index to determine the initial site of treatment for patients with pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Many emergency department (ED) providers do not follow guideline recommendations for the use of the pneumonia severity index (PSI) to determine the initial site of treatment for patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). We identified the reasons why ED providers hospitalize low-risk patients or manage higher-risk patients as outpatients. METHODS: As a part of a trial to implement a PSI-based guideline for the initial site of treatment of patients with CAP, we analyzed data for patients managed at 12 EDs allocated to a high-intensity guideline implementation strategy study arm. The guideline recommended outpatient care for low-risk patients (nonhypoxemic patients with a PSI risk classification of I, II, or III) and hospitalization for higher-risk patients (hypoxemic patients or patients with a PSI risk classification of IV or V). We asked providers who made guideline-discordant decisions on site of treatment to detail the reasons for nonadherence to guideline recommendations. RESULTS: There were 1,306 patients with CAP (689 low-risk patients and 617 higher-risk patients). Among these patients, physicians admitted 258 (37.4%) of 689 low-risk patients and treated 20 (3.2%) of 617 higher-risk patients as outpatients. The most commonly reported reasons for admitting low-risk patients were the presence of a comorbid illness (178 [71.5%] of 249 patients); a laboratory value, vital sign, or symptom that precluded ED discharge (73 patients [29.3%]); or a recommendation from a primary care or a consulting physician (48 patients [19.3%]). Higher-risk patients were most often treated as outpatients because of a recommendation by a primary care or consulting physician (6 [40.0%] of 15 patients). CONCLUSION: ED providers hospitalize many low-risk patients with CAP, most frequently for a comorbid illness. Although higher-risk patients are infrequently treated as outpatients, this decision is often based on the request of an involved physician.

Continuous Sunitinib treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) and Swiss Association for the Study of the Liver (SASL) multicenter phase II trial (SAKK 77/06).

BACKGROUND: Sunitinib (SU) is a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor with antitumor and antiangiogenic activity. The objective of this trial was to demonstrate antitumor activity of continuous SU treatment in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Key eligibility criteria included unresectable or metastatic HCC, no prior systemic anticancer treatment, measurable disease, and Child-Pugh class A or mild Child-Pugh class B liver dysfunction. Patients received 37.5 mg SU daily until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival at 12 weeks (PFS12). RESULTS: Forty-five patients were enrolled. The median age was 63 years; 89% had Child-Pugh class A disease and 47% had distant metastases. PFS12 was rated successful in 15 patients (33%; 95% confidence interval, 20%-47%). Over the whole trial period, one complete response and a 40% rate of stable disease as the best response were achieved. The median PFS duration, disease stabilization duration, time to progression, and overall survival time were 1.5, 2.9, 1.5, and 9.3 months, respectively. Grade 3 and 4 adverse events were infrequent. None of the 33 deaths were considered drug related. CONCLUSION: Continuous SU treatment with 37.5 mg daily is feasible and has moderate activity in patients with advanced HCC and mild to moderately impaired liver dysfunction. Under this trial design (>13 PFS12 successes), the therapy is considered promising. This is the first trial describing the clinical effects of continuous dosing of SU in HCC patients on a schedule that is used in an ongoing, randomized, phase III trial in comparison with the current treatment standard, sorafenib (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00699374).

A phase I study of the oral platinum agent satraplatin in sequential combination with capecitabine in the treatment of patients with advanced solid malignancies.

Abstract Background. The broad spectrum of antitumor activity of both the oral platinum analogue satraplatin (S) and capecitabine (C), along with the advantage of their oral administration, prompted a clinical study aimed to define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the combination. Patients and methods. Four dose levels of S (mg/m(2)/day) and C (mg/m(2)/day) were evaluated in adult patients with advanced solid tumors: 60/1650, 80/1650, 60/2000, 70/2000; a course consisted of 28 days with sequential administration of S (days 1-5) and C (days 8-21) followed by one week rest. Results. Thirty-seven patients were treated, 24 in the dose escalation and 13 in the expansion phase; at the MTD, defined at S 70/C 2000, two patients presented dose limiting toxicities: lack of recovery of neutropenia by day 42 and nausea with dose skip of C. Most frequent toxicities were nausea (57%), diarrhea (51%), neutropenia (46%), anorexia, fatigue, vomiting (38% each). Two partial responses were observed in platinum sensitive ovarian cancer and one in prostate cancer. Conclusion. At S 70/C 2000 the combination of sequential S and C is tolerated with manageable toxicities; its evaluation in platinum and fluorouracil sensitive tumor types is worthwhile because of the easier administration and lack of nephro- and neurotoxicity as compared to parent compounds.

Treatment of chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 with triple therapy comprising telaprevir or boceprevir.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a leading cause of chronic hepatitis, liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma worldwide. Two first-generation protease inhibitors, telaprevir and boceprevir, have recently been approved for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C genotype 1. Triple therapy comprising pegylated interferon-α, ribavirin and telaprevir or boceprevir increases sustained virological response rates to ~70% and allows to shorten treatment duration in ~½ of treatment-naïve patients with chronic hepatitis C genotype 1. Sustained virological response rates in treatment-experienced patients depend on the response to previous treatment, ranging from >80% in previous relapsers to ~30% in previous null responders. These advances come at the expense of new adverse effects and increased cost. In addition, treatment of chronic hepatitis C will become more complex. In these times of changing medical practice, the present expert opinion statement by the Swiss Association for the Study of the Liver shall provide guidance on the treatment of chronic hepatitis C with triple therapy comprising telaprevir or boceprevir.

Guidelines for the safe administration of cytotoxic medical preparations in the treatment of patients with cancer

The Minister for Health’s Strategy for effective health care in the 1990s has emphasised quality of service as one of its key principles.  Within the medical sphere, almost no other field has developed and continues to expand as rapidly as that of cancer biology and treatment.  Cytotoxic therapies are a major part of these developments. The Cancer Strategy has highlighted the importance of these drugs in the treatment of cancers. Download the Report here

Assessment of the capacity to consent to treatment in patients admitted to acute medical wards

RAPPORT DE SYNTHÈSE : Introduction: L'évaluation de la capacité de discernement est importante d'un point de vue légal et éthique dans l'activité médicale quotidienne. Dans cette étude, nous avons évalué attentivement la capacité de discernement chez les patients admis dans un service médical aigu en utilisant l'évaluation du personnel médical, le score spécifique de Silberfeld, le MMSE ainsi que l'évaluation du psychiatre. Méthode : Pendant 3 mois, 195 patients admis dans un service de médecine interne d'un hôpital universitaire ont été inclus et leur capacité de discernement a été évaluée durant les premières 72 heures d'admission. Résultats : Sur les 195 patients, 38 furent incapables de discernement manifestement (patients inconscients ou avec des déficits cognitifs sévères) et 14 furent considérés incapables de discernement par le psychiatre (prévalence de l'incapacité de discernement de 26.7%). La corrélation entre l'évaluation du psychiatre et le questionnaire de Silberfeld fut faible (sensibilité 35.7%, spécificité 91.6%). Les cliniciens expérimentés montrèrent une plus haute corrélation (sensibilité 57.1 %, spécificité 96.5%). L'avis partagé par l'assistant, par le chef de clinique et l'infirmière se révéla le meilleur indicateur de l'évaluation psychiatrique (sensibilité 78.6%, spécificité 94.3%). Conclusion : La prévalence de l'incapacité de discernement chez les patients admis dans un service de médecine interne est élevée. Alors que le questionnaire de Silberfeld et le MMSE ne sont pas indiqués pour évaluer la capacité de discernement dans cette étude, l'évaluation par une équipe médicale multidisciplinaire reflète le mieux l'évaluation du psychiatre.

An international, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial of pregabalin monotherapy in treatment of patients with fibromyalgia.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pregabalin monotherapy versus placebo for symptomatic pain relief and improvement of patient global assessment in patients with fibromyalgia (FM) enrolled from countries outside the United States. METHODS: This international, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial randomly assigned 747 patients with FM to placebo or 300, 450, or 600 mg/day pregabalin twice daily for 14 weeks. Primary efficacy measures were endpoint mean pain scores and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC). Secondary outcomes included assessments of sleep and function. RESULTS: Patients in the 450 mg/day pregabalin group showed significant improvements versus placebo in endpoint mean pain score (-0.56; p = 0.0132), PGIC (73% improved vs 56% placebo; p = 0.0017), and function [Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) total score -5.85; p = 0.0012]. PGIC was also significant for 600 mg/day pregabalin (69% improved; p = 0.0227). Results for these endpoints were nonsignificant for pregabalin at 300 mg/day and for pain and FIQ score at 600 mg/day. Early onset of pain relief was seen, with separation from placebo detected by Week 1 in all pregabalin groups. All pregabalin doses demonstrated superiority to placebo on the Medical Outcomes Study-Sleep Scale Sleep Disturbance subscale and the Sleep Quality diary. Dizziness and somnolence were the most frequently reported adverse events. CONCLUSION: Pregabalin demonstrated modest efficacy in pain, global assessment, and function in FM at 450 mg/day, and improved sleep across all dose levels, but it did not provide consistent evidence of benefit at 300 and 600 mg/day in this study. Pregabalin was generally well tolerated for the treatment of FM. (Clinical trial registry NCT00333866).