Estudo clínico duplo cego comparando praziquantel com oxamniquine

Com objetivo de se compararem a tolerabilidade e eficácia do praziquantel e oxamniquine, procedeu-se a um estudo prospectivo duplo-cego envolvendo 120 pacientes com esquistossomose intestinal ou hepatintestinal. Os pacientes foram randomizados em dois grupos. Um foi tratado com praziquantel, na dose de 55 mg/kg de peso, o outro com oxamniquine, 15 mg/kg de peso, sempre administrados em dose única por via oral. O diagnóstico e seguimento parasitológicos basearam-se ho exame de fazes peio método de Kate Katz. Em 73 de 77 casos negativos após tratamento, executaram-se biópsias retais. Efeitos colaterais, principalmente tontura, sonolência, dores abdominais, cefaléia, náuseas e diarréia foram observados em 87% dos casos. Sua incidência, intensidade e duração foram semelhantes em ambos os grupos, mas a dor abdominal foi significativamente mais freqüente após praziquantel, havendo maior tendência para tontura intensa após oxamniquine. Observou-se aumento significante de alamina-aminotransferase e gama-glutamiltransferase após oxamniquine e de bilirrubina total após praziquantel. Um total de 48 pacientes tratados com praziquantel e 46 com oxamniquine completaram os exames de controle até o sexto mês. As percentages de cura foram de 79,2% e de 84,8% respectivamente, diferença não significativa. Os pacientes não curados mostraram redução média do número de ovos de 93,5% e de 84,1%, diferença não significativa. Cinco pacientes retratados com praziquantel curaram-se, mas somente um de três retratados com oxamniquine. Estes resultados mostram, que ambas as drogas-apesar de diferentes propriedades farmacológicas provocam reações colaterais semelhantes e apresentam eficácia terapêutica comparável.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

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

Incidence of severe critical events in paediatric anaesthesia (APRICOT): a prospective multicentre observational study in 261 hospitals in Europe

Background Little is known about the incidence of severe critical events in children undergoing general anaesthesia in Europe. We aimed to identify the incidence, nature, and outcome of severe critical events in children undergoing anaesthesia, and the associated potential risk factors. Methods The APRICOT study was a prospective observational multicentre cohort study of children from birth to 15 years of age undergoing elective or urgent anaesthesia for diagnostic or surgical procedures. Children were eligible for inclusion during a 2-week period determined prospectively by each centre. There were 261 participating centres across 33 European countries. The primary endpoint was the occurence of perioperative severe critical events requiring immediate intervention. A severe critical event was defined as the occurrence of respiratory, cardiac, allergic, or neurological complications requiring immediate intervention and that led (or could have led) to major disability or death. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01878760. Findings Between April 1, 2014, and Jan 31, 2015, 31â127 anaesthetic procedures in 30â874 children with a mean age of 6·35 years (SD 4·50) were included. The incidence of perioperative severe critical events was 5·2% (95% CI 5·0â5·5) with an incidence of respiratory critical events of 3·1% (2·9â3·3). Cardiovascular instability occurred in 1·9% (1·7â2·1), with an immediate poor outcome in 5·4% (3·7â7·5) of these cases. The all-cause 30-day in-hospital mortality rate was 10 in 10â000. This was independent of type of anaesthesia. Age (relative risk 0·88, 95% CI 0·86â0·90; p<0·0001), medical history, and physical condition (1·60, 1·40â1·82; p<0·0001) were the major risk factors for a serious critical event. Multivariate analysis revealed evidence for the beneficial effect of years of experience of the most senior anaesthesia team member (0·99, 0·981â0·997; p<0·0048 for respiratory critical events, and 0·98, 0·97â0·99; p=0·0039 for cardiovascular critical events), rather than the type of health institution or providers. Interpretation This study highlights a relatively high rate of severe critical events during the anaesthesia management of children for surgical or diagnostic procedures in Europe, and a large variability in the practice of paediatric anaesthesia. These findings are substantial enough to warrant attention from national, regional, and specialist societies to target education of anaesthesiologists and their teams and implement strategies for quality improvement in paediatric anaesthesia. Funding European Society of Anaesthesiology

Incidence of severe critical events in paediatric anaesthesia (APRICOT): a prospective multicentre observational study in 261 hospitals in Europe

Background Little is known about the incidence of severe critical events in children undergoing general anaesthesia in Europe. We aimed to identify the incidence, nature, and outcome of severe critical events in children undergoing anaesthesia, and the associated potential risk factors. Methods The APRICOT study was a prospective observational multicentre cohort study of children from birth to 15 years of age undergoing elective or urgent anaesthesia for diagnostic or surgical procedures. Children were eligible for inclusion during a 2-week period determined prospectively by each centre. There were 261 participating centres across 33 European countries. The primary endpoint was the occurence of perioperative severe critical events requiring immediate intervention. A severe critical event was defined as the occurrence of respiratory, cardiac, allergic, or neurological complications requiring immediate intervention and that led (or could have led) to major disability or death. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01878760. Findings Between April 1, 2014, and Jan 31, 2015, 31 127 anaesthetic procedures in 30 874 children with a mean age of 6.35 years (SD 4.50) were included. The incidence of perioperative severe critical events was 5.2% (95% CI 5.0-5.5) with an incidence of respiratory critical events of 3.1% (2.9-3.3). Cardiovascular instability occurred in 1.9% (1.7-2.1), with an immediate poor outcome in 5.4% (3.7-7.5) of these cases. The all-cause 30-day in-hospital mortality rate was 10 in 10 000. This was independent of type of anaesthesia. Age (relative risk 0.88, 95% CI 0.86-0.90; p<0.0001), medical history, and physical condition (1.60, 1.40-1.82; p<0.0001) were the major risk factors for a serious critical event. Multivariate analysis revealed evidence for the beneficial effect of years of experience of the most senior anaesthesia team member (0.99, 0.981-0.997; p<0.0048 for respiratory critical events, and 0.98, 0.97-0.99; p=0.0039 for cardiovascular critical events), rather than the type of health institution or providers. Interpretation This study highlights a relatively high rate of severe critical events during the anaesthesia management of children for surgical or diagnostic procedures in Europe, and a large variability in the practice of paediatric anaesthesia. These findings are substantial enough to warrant attention from national, regional, and specialist societies to target education of anaesthesiologists and their teams and implement strategies for quality improvement in paediatric anaesthesia

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field

Characteristics and outcomes of an international cohort of 600 000 hospitalized patients with COVID-19

Background: We describe demographic features, treatments and clinical outcomes in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC) COVID-19 cohort, one of the world's largest international, standardized data sets concerning hospitalized patients. Methods: The data set analysed includes COVID-19 patients hospitalized between January 2020 and January 2022 in 52 countries. We investigated how symptoms on admission, co-morbidities, risk factors and treatments varied by age, sex and other characteristics. We used Cox regression models to investigate associations between demographics, symptoms, co-morbidities and other factors with risk of death, admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Results: Data were available for 689 572 patients with laboratory-confirmed (91.1%) or clinically diagnosed (8.9%) SARS-CoV-2 infection from 52 countries. Age [adjusted hazard ratio per 10 years 1.49 (95% CI 1.48, 1.49)] and male sex [1.23 (1.21, 1.24)] were associated with a higher risk of death. Rates of admission to an ICU and use of IMV increased with age up to age 60&nbsp;years then dropped. Symptoms, co-morbidities and treatments varied by age and had varied associations with clinical outcomes. The case-fatality ratio varied by country partly due to differences in the clinical characteristics of recruited patients and was on average 21.5%. Conclusions: Age was the strongest determinant of risk of death, with a ∼30-fold difference between the oldest and youngest groups; each of the co-morbidities included was associated with up to an almost 2-fold increase in risk. Smoking and obesity were also associated with a higher risk of death.&nbsp;The size of our international database and the standardized data collection method make this study a comprehensive international description of COVID-19 clinical features. Our findings may inform strategies that involve prioritization of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who have a higher risk of death

The value of open-source clinical science in pandemic response: lessons from ISARIC

International audienc

ISARIC-COVID-19 dataset: A Prospective, Standardized, Global Dataset of Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19

The International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC) COVID-19 dataset is one of the largest international databases of prospectively collected clinical data on people hospitalized with COVID-19. This dataset was compiled during the COVID-19 pandemic by a network of hospitals that collect data using the ISARIC-World Health Organization Clinical Characterization Protocol and data tools. The database includes data from more than 705,000 patients, collected in more than 60 countries and 1,500 centres worldwide. Patient data are available from acute hospital admissions with COVID-19 and outpatient follow-ups. The data include signs and symptoms, pre-existing comorbidities, vital signs, chronic and acute treatments, complications, dates of hospitalization and discharge, mortality, viral strains, vaccination status, and other data. Here, we present the dataset characteristics, explain its architecture and how to gain access, and provide tools to facilitate its use