3 research outputs found
Oral versus intramuscular administration of vitamin B12 for vitamin B12 deficiency in primary care : a pragmatic, randomised, non-inferiority clinical trial (OB12)
The trial was financed by Ministerio de Sanidad y Consumo Español through their call for independent clinical research, Orden Ministerial SAS/2377, 2010 (EC10-115, EC10-116, EC10-117, EC10-119, EC10-122); CAIBER—Spanish Clinical Research Network, Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII) (CAI08/010044); and Gerencia Asistencial de Atención Primaria de Madrid. This study is also supported by the Spanish Clinical Research Network (SCReN), funded by ISCIII-Subdirección General de Evaluación y Fomento de la Investigación, project number PT13/0002/0007, within the National Research Program I+D+I 2013-2016 and co-funded with European Union ERDF funds (European Regional Development Fund). This project received a grant for the translation and publication of this article from the Foundation for Biomedical Research and Innovation in Primary Care (FIIBAP) Call 2017 for grants to promote research programs.Objectives To compare the effectiveness of oral versus intramuscular (IM) vitamin B12 (VB12) in patients aged ≥65 years with VB12 deficiency. Design Pragmatic, randomised, non-inferiority, multicentre trial in 22 primary healthcare centres in Madrid (Spain). Participants 283 patients ≥65 years with VB12 deficiency were randomly assigned to oral (n=140) or IM (n=143) treatment arm. Interventions The IM arm received 1 mg VB12 on alternate days in weeks 1–2, 1 mg/week in weeks 3–8 and 1 mg/month in weeks 9–52. The oral arm received 1 mg/day in weeks 1–8 and 1 mg/week in weeks 9–52. Main outcomes Serum VB12 concentration normalisation (≥211 pg/mL) at 8, 26 and 52 weeks. Non-inferiority would be declared if the difference between arms is 10% or less. Secondary outcomes included symptoms, adverse events, adherence to treatment, quality of life, patient preferences and satisfaction. Results The follow-up period (52 weeks) was completed by 229 patients (80.9%). At week 8, the percentage of patients in each arm who achieved normal B12 levels was well above 90%; the differences in this percentage between the oral and IM arm were −0.7% (133 out of 135 vs 129 out of 130; 95% CI: −3.2 to 1.8; p>0.999) by per-protocol (PPT) analysis and 4.8% (133 out of 140 vs 129 out of 143; 95% CI: −1.3 to 10.9; p=0.124) by intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. At week 52, the percentage of patients who achieved normal B12 levels was 73.6% in the oral arm and 80.4% in the IM arm; these differences were −6.3% (103 out of 112 vs 115 out of 117; 95% CI: −11.9 to −0.1; p=0.025) and −6.8% (103 out of 140 vs 115 out of 143; 95% CI: −16.6 to 2.9; p=0.171), respectively. Factors affecting the success rate at week 52 were age, OR=0.95 (95% CI: 0.91 to 0.99) and having reached VB12 levels ≥281 pg/mL at week 8, OR=8.1 (95% CI: 2.4 to 27.3). Under a Bayesian framework, non-inferiority probabilities (Δ>−10%) at week 52 were 0.036 (PPT) and 0.060 (ITT). Quality of life and adverse effects were comparable across groups. 83.4% of patients preferred the oral route. Conclusions Oral administration was no less effective than IM administration at 8 weeks. Although differences were found between administration routes at week 52, the probability that the differences were below the non-inferiority threshold was very low.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe
Prevalence of submicroscopic malaria infection in immigrants living in Spain
BACKGROUND: The importance of submicroscopic malaria infections in high-transmission areas could contribute to maintain the parasite cycle. Regarding non-endemic areas, its importance remains barely understood because parasitaemia in these afebrile patients is usually below the detection limits for microscopy, hence molecular techniques are often needed for its diagnosis. In addition to this, the lack of standardized protocols for the screening of submicroscopic malaria in immigrants from endemic areas may underestimate the infection with Plasmodium spp. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of submicroscopic malaria in afebrile immigrants living in a non-endemic area. METHODS: A prospective, observational, multicentre study was conducted. Afebrile immigrants were included, microscopic observation of Giemsa-stained thin and thick blood smears, and two different molecular techniques detecting Plasmodium spp. were performed. Patients with submicroscopic malaria were defined as patients with negative blood smears and detection of DNA of Plasmodium spp. with one or both molecular techniques. Demographic, clinical, analytical and microbiological features were recorded and univariate analysis by subgroups was carried out with STATA v15. RESULTS: A total of 244 afebrile immigrants were included in the study. Of them, 14 had a submicroscopic malaria infection, yielding a prevalence of 5.7% (95% confidence interval 3.45-9.40). In 71.4% of the positive PCR/negative microscopy cases, Plasmodium falciparum alone was the main detected species (10 out of the 14 patients) and in 4 cases (28.6%) Plasmodium vivax or Plasmodium ovale were detected. One patient had a mixed infection including three different species. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of submicroscopic malaria in afebrile immigrants was similar to that previously described in Spain. Plasmodium vivax and P. ovale were detected in almost a third of the submicroscopic infections. Screening protocols for afebrile immigrants with molecular techniques could be useful for a proper management of these patients.This work was funded by projects PI14/01671, PI17/01791 and PI14CIII/00014, from the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness) and cofounded by the European Regional Development Fund, and approved by the Ethics Committee of our Institution. There was no funding from the PCR manufacturers; they did not play any role in data analysis or in the reporting of the results.S