Mixed evidence for the compression of morbidity hypothesis for smoking elimination

__Background:__ There is debate around the composition of life years gained from smoking elimination. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the literature to synthesize existing evidence on the effect of smoking status on health expectancy and to examine whether smoking elimination leads to compression of morbidity. __Methods:__ Five databases were systematically searched for peer-reviewed articles. Studies that presented quantitative estimates of health expectancy for smokers and non-/never-smokers were eligible for inclusion. Studies were searched, selected and reviewed by two reviewers who extracted the relevant data and assessed the risk of bias of the included articles independently. __Results:__ The search identified 2491 unique records, whereof 20 articles were eligible for inclusion (including 26 cohorts). The indicators used to measure health included disability/activity limitations (n¼9), health-related quality of life (EQ-5D) (n¼2), weighted disabilities (n¼1), self-rated health (n¼9), chronic diseases (n¼6), cardiovascular diseases (n¼4) and cognitive impairment (n¼1). Available evidence showed consistently that non-/never-smokers experience more healthy life years throughout their lives than smokers. Findings were inconsistent on the effect of smoking on the absolute number of unhealthy life years. Findings concerning the time proportionally spent unhealthy were less heterogeneous: nearly all included articles reported that non-/never-smokers experience relatively less unhealthy life years (e.g. relative compression of morbidity). __Conclusions:__ Support for the relative compression of morbidity due to smoking elimination was evident. Further research is needed into the absolute compression of morbidity hypothesis since current evidence is mixed, and methodology of studies needs to be harmonized

Preventing Nerve Function Impairment in Leprosy: Validation and Updating of a Prediction Rule

Leprosy is caused by a bacterium that attacks the peripheral nerves. This may cause nerve function impairment (NFI), resulting in handicaps and disabilities. Therefore, prediction and prevention of NFI is extremely important in the management of leprosy. In 2000, a prediction rule for NFI was published, but circumstances have changed since the study was performed in the 1990s: the leprosy detection delay has shortened and the definition of NFI has changed. The original rule used ‘leprosy classification’ and ‘NFI present at diagnosis’ to predict future NFI. In the current patient population we studied an adjusted rule based on ‘leprosy classification’ and ‘presence of antibodies’. This adjusted rule predicted NFI more often than the original rule. With the adjusted rule it is now also possible to assess NFI risk before the first nerve damage event takes place. This may help doctors and health workers to improve surveillance for people at high risk. Early detection and treatment can then prevent permanent disabilities

Interventions for erythema nodosum leprosum

Background Erythema nodosum leprosum (ENL) is a serious immunological complication of leprosy, causing inflammation of skin, nerves, other organs, and general malaise. Many different therapies exist for ENL, but it is unclear if they work or which therapy is optimal. Objectives To assess the effects of interventions for erythema nodosum leprosum. Search strategy We searched the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library (Issue 1, 2009), MEDLINE (from 2003), EMBASE (from 2005), LILACS and AMED (from inception), CINAHL (from 1981), and databases of ongoing trials, all in March 2009. We checked reference lists of articles and contacted the American Leprosy Missions in Brazil to locate studies. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions for ENL in people with leprosy. Data collection and analysis Two authors performed study selection, assessed trial quality, and extracted data. Main results We included 13 studies with a total of 445 participants. The quality of the trials was generally poor and no results could be pooled due to the treatments being so heterogeneous. Treatment with thalidomide showed a significant remission of skin lesions compared to acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin) (RR 2.43; 95% CI 1.28 to 4.59) (1 trial, 92 participants). Clofazimine treatment was superior to prednisolone (more treatment successes; RR 3.67; 95% CI 1.36 to 9.91) (1 trial, 24 participants), and thalidomide (fewer recurrences; RR0.08; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.56) (1 trial, 72 participants). We did not find any significant benefit for intravenous betamethasone compared to dextrose (1 trial, 10 participants), pentoxifylline compared to thalidomide (1 trial, 44 participants), indomethacin compared to prednisolone, aspirin or chloroquine treatments (2 trials, 80 participants), or levamisole compared to placebo (1 trial, 12 participants). Mild to moderate adverse events were significantly lower in participants taking 100 mg thalidomide compared to 300 mg thalidomide daily (RR 0.46; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.93). Significantly more minor adverse events were reported in participants taking clofazimine compared with prednisolone (RR 1.92; 95% CI 1.10 to 3.35). None of the studies assessed quality of life or economic outcomes. Authors' conclusions There is some evidence of benefit for thalidomide and clofazimine, but generally we did not find clear evidence of benefit for interventions in the management of ENL. However, this does not mean they do not work, because the studies were small and poorly reported. Larger studies using clearly defined participants, outcome measures, and internationally recognised scales are urgently required

Second intravenous immunoglobulin dose in patients with Guillain-Barre syndrome with poor prognosis (SID-GBS):a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

Background Treatment with one standard dose (2 g/kg) of intravenous immunoglobulin is insufficient in a proportion of patients with severe Guillain-Barre syndrome. Worldwide, around 25% of patients severely affected with the syndrome are given a second intravenous immunoglobulin dose (SID), although it has not been proven effective. We aimed to investigate whether a SID is effective in patients with Guillain-Barre syndrome with a predicted poor outcome. Methods In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (SID-GBS), we included patients (>= 12 years) with Guillain-Barre syndrome admitted to one of 59 participating hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients were included on the first day of standard intravenous immunoglobulin treatment (2 g/kg over 5 days). Only patients with a poor prognosis (score of >= 6) according to the modified Erasmus Guillain-Barre syndrome Outcome Score were randomly assigned, via block randomisation stratified by centre, to SID (2 g/kg over 5 days) or to placebo, 7-9 days after inclusion. Patients, outcome adjudicators, monitors, and the steering committee were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was the Guillain-Barre syndrome disability score 4 weeks after inclusion. All patients in whom allocated trial medication was started were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Findings Between Feb 16, 2010, and June 5, 2018, 327 of 339 patients assessed for eligibility were included. 112 had a poor prognosis. Of those, 93 patients with a poor prognosis were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis: 49 (53%) received SID and 44 (47%) received placebo. The adjusted common odds ratio for improvement on the Guillain-Barre syndrome disability score at 4 weeks was 1.4 (95% CI 0.6-3.3; p=0.45). Patients given SID had more serious adverse events (35% vs 16% in the first 30 days), including thromboembolic events, than those in the placebo group. Four patients died in the intervention group (13-24 weeks after randomisation). Interpretation Our study does not provide evidence that patients with Guillain-Barre syndrome with a poor prognosis benefit from a second intravenous immunoglobulin course; moreover, it entails a risk of serious adverse events. Therefore, a second intravenous immunoglobulin course should not be considered for treatment of Guillain-Barre syndrome because of a poor prognosis. The results indicate the need for treatment trials with other immune modulators in patients severely affected by Guillain-Barre syndrome. Funding Prinses Beatrix Spierfonds and Sanquin Plasma Products. Copyright (C) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

A Systematic Review of Immunological Studies of Erythema Nodosum Leprosum.

Erythema nodosum leprosum (ENL) is a painful inflammatory complication of leprosy occurring in 50% of lepromatous leprosy patients and 5-10% of borderline lepromatous patients. It is a significant cause of economic hardship, morbidity and mortality in leprosy patients. Our understanding of the causes of ENL is limited. We performed a systematic review of the published literature and critically evaluated the evidence for the role of neutrophils, immune complexes (ICs), T-cells, cytokines, and other immunological factors that could contribute to the development of ENL. Searches of the literature were performed in PubMed. Studies, independent of published date, using samples from patients with ENL were included. The search revealed more than 20,000 articles of which 146 eligible studies were included in this systematic review. The studies demonstrate that ENL may be associated with a neutrophilic infiltrate, but it is not clear whether it is an IC-mediated process or that the presence of ICs is an epiphenomenon. Increased levels of tumor necrosis factor-α and other pro-inflammatory cytokines support the role of this cytokine in the inflammatory phase of ENL but not necessarily the initiation. T-cell subsets appear to be important in ENL since multiple studies report an increased CD4+/CD8+ ratio in both skin and peripheral blood of patients with ENL. Microarray data have identified new molecules and whole pathophysiological pathways associated with ENL and provides new insights into the pathogenesis of ENL. Studies of ENL are often difficult to compare due to a lack of case definitions, treatment status, and timing of sampling as well as the use of different laboratory techniques. A standardized approach to some of these issues would be useful. ENL appears to be a complex interaction of various aspects of the immune system. Rigorous clinical descriptions of well-defined cohorts of patients and a systems biology approach using available technologies such as genomics, epigenomics, transcriptomics, and proteomics could yield greater understanding of the condition