Loperamide Dependence: A Case Report

Background: Loperamide is used as an antidiarrheal drug and is available over-the-counter. It cannot pass the blood-brain barrier and it does not have a considerable abuse potential. It can lead to dangerous cardiac arrhythmia.Case Report: Herein, we report a 35-year-old man with a 13-year history of abusing opioids who had undergone detoxification for four times during this period. He underwent detoxification for using 200 mg loperamide daily with anticholinergic agents, clonidine, non-steroidal analgesics, and diazepam. No evidence of arrhythmia was seen in the patient.Conclusion: Tolerating high doses of loperamide could be dangerous and increases the risk of fatal cardiac arrhythmias

Drug-Drug Interaction between Psychiatric Medications and Experimental Treatments for Coronavirus Disease-19: A Mini-Review

The pandemic of coronavirus disease (COVID)-2019 has been affected many people all around the world. Patients with mental disorders are not as safe as others; also, they might be more vulnerable in such situations. These patients take various medications, which can lead to numerous drug-drug interactions with experimental drugs uses against COVID-19. According to the potential critical interactions, we reviewed the reputable databases to find the interactions between main categories of psychiatric medications (e.g., antidepressants, anti-psychotics, sedative/hypnotics, and mood stabilizers) when used in concomitant with COVID-19 experimental agents (e.g., hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, atazanavir, and chloroquine). We hope the list provided in this review helps the clinical care staff in treating patients with mental illness infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 during the COVID-19 pandemic

Upgrading Fuzzy Extractors

Fuzzy extractors derive stable keys from noisy sources non-interactively (Dodis et al., SIAM Journal of Computing 2008). Since their introduction, research has focused on two tasks: 1) showing security for as many distributions as possible and 2) providing stronger security guarantees including allowing one to enroll the same value multiple times (reusability), security against an active attacker (robustness), and preventing leakage about the enrolled value (privacy). Existing constructions of reusable fuzzy extractors are direct and do not support as many distributions as the best non-reusable constructions. Constructions of robust fuzzy extractors require strong assumptions even in the CRS model. Given the need for progress on the basic fuzzy extractor primitive, it is prudent to seek generic mechanisms to transform a fuzzy extractor into one that is robust, private, and reusable so that it can inherit further improvements. This work asks if one can generically upgrade fuzzy extractors to achieve robustness, privacy, and reusability. We show positive and negative results: we show upgrades for robustness and privacy, but we provide a negative result on reuse. 1. We upgrade (private) fuzzy extractors to be robust under weaker assumptions than previously known in the common reference string model. 2. We show a generic upgrade for a private fuzzy extractor using multi-bit compute and compare (MBCC) obfuscation (Wichs and Zirdelis, FOCS 2017) that requires less entropy than prior work. 3. We show one cannot arbitrarily compose private fuzzy extractors. It is known one cannot reuse an arbitrary fuzzy extractor; each enrollment can leak a constant fraction of the input entropy. We show that one cannot build a reusable private fuzzy extractor by considering other enrollments as auxiliary input. In particular, we show that assuming MBCC obfuscation and collision-resistant hash functions, there does not exist a private fuzzy extractor secure against unpredictable auxiliary inputs strengthening a negative result of Brzuska et al. (Crypto 2014)

Comparing the Impact of Atropine Drops and Amitriptyline Tablets in Treatment of Clozapine-Induced Sialorrhea: A Randomized Double-Blind Placebo Controlled Clinical Trial

Clozapine is an atypical antipsychotic employed to treat patients with psychotic disorders. It is associated with sialorrhea as a problematic adverse effect in 30-80% of cases. Various medications such as atropine and amitriptyline have been suggested for its treatment. We aimed to compare the effects of atropine drops and amitriptyline tablets in the treatment of clozapine-induced sialorrhea. The present double-blind, randomized clinical trial aimed to evaluate the effect of atropine drops and amitriptyline tablets in reducing clozapine-induced sialorrhea in patients with psychotic disorders. Forty-six patients were treated for 4 weeks in two groups: group “A”(atropine drops and placebo tablets) and group “B” (amitriptyline tablets and placebo drops). Toronto Nocturnal Hypersalivation Scale (TNHS) and Clinical Global Impression (CGI) rating scale were used for measurement of the severity and frequency of sialorrhea and global symptom severity and treatment response, respectively. Kolmogorov–Smirnov, Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used for statistical analyses. Demographic information of the two groups had no significant difference (P>0.05). There was no patient with adverse effects that interfered with the study. Mean TNHS and Meier scores in groups “A” and “B” were 3.48±0.21 vs.3.24±0.18, and 1.9±0.07 vs.1.86±0.07, respectively, and the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.35 vs. P=0.67). In patients with clozapine-induced sialorrhea, 1% atropine drops (1.7 mg sublingual drops daily) can be just as effective as amitriptyline tablets (29.08 mg daily, oral) in controlling sialorrhea

Evaluation of the Effect of Combination Therapy on Treatment of COVID-19: A Cohort Study

Background: COVID-19 is a new disease for which a definitive treatment has not yet been proposed. Objectives: The present study aimed to investigate the effect of combination therapy on the treatment of COVID-19 due to the importance of finding an appropriate treatment for this epidemic disease. Methods: This two-center cohort study included 175 confirmed COVID-19 inpatients at two medical centers designated for the treatment of COVID-19 patients in Qom and Qazvin, Iran. In this study, four different groups of drug regimens were studied which included G1 (azithromycin, prednisolone, and naproxen), G2 (lopinavir/ritonavir, azithromycin, naproxen, and prednisolone), G3 (hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, naproxen, and prednisolone), and G4 (levofloxacin, vancomycin, hydroxychloroquine, and oseltamivir). It should be noted that G1, G2, G3, and G4 treatment regimens were used on 48, 39,30, and 77 patients, respectively. Results: The study participants included 175 confirmed COVID-19 patients with mean±SD age of 58.9 ±15.1 years, out of whom 80 (46%) patients were male and the rest were females. The results indicated that the hospital stay period was significantly shorter in the G1 compared to other groups (G1:5.9±2.4, G2:8.1±4.2, G3: 6.3±1.7, and G4: 6.4±2.9; [P-value=0.008]). It should be noted that pulse rate, oxygen saturation, hemoglobin, and platelet count (PLT) changed significantly during the study in four treatment groups; however, a significant change in temperature, creatinine, and white blood cell (WBC) was observed only in G3, G4, and G1 groups, respectively. The number of ICU admissions and deaths were not statistically significant among the patients who received the four treatment regimens (P=0.785). Based on the results, the history of ischemic heart disease, baseline oxygen saturation, WBC, neutrophil, lymphocyte count, and C-reactive protein (CRP) are the risk factors for the prolonged hospital stay in COVID-19 patients. Conclusion: The obtained results in this study indicated that the combination of azithromycin, prednisolone, and naproxen is the most effective regimen for the treatment of COVID-19, compared to three other combination treatment regimens. Keywords: Anti-inflammatory drugs, Antiviral drugs, Combination therapy, Corticosteroid, COVID-19, Immunomodulators drug

Epidemiology of injuries from fire, heat and hot substances : global, regional and national morbidity and mortality estimates from the Global Burden of Disease 2017 study

Background Past research has shown how fires, heat and hot substances are important causes of health loss globally. Detailed estimates of the morbidity and mortality from these injuries could help drive preventative measures and improved access to care. Methods We used the Global Burden of Disease 2017 framework to produce three main results. First, we produced results on incidence, prevalence, years lived with disability, deaths, years of life lost and disability-adjusted life years from 1990 to 2017 for 195 countries and territories. Second, we analysed these results to measure mortality-to-incidence ratios by location. Third, we reported the measures above in terms of the cause of fire, heat and hot substances and the types of bodily injuries that result. Results Globally, there were 8 991 468 (7 481 218 to 10 740 897) new fire, heat and hot substance injuries in 2017 with 120 632 (101 630 to 129 383) deaths. At the global level, the age-standardised mortality caused by fire, heat and hot substances significantly declined from 1990 to 2017, but regionally there was variability in age-standardised incidence with some regions experiencing an increase (eg, Southern Latin America) and others experiencing a significant decrease (eg, High-income North America). Conclusions The incidence and mortality of injuries that result from fire, heat and hot substances affect every region of the world but are most concentrated in middle and lower income areas. More resources should be invested in measuring these injuries as well as in improving infrastructure, advancing safety measures and ensuring access to care.Peer reviewe

Global, regional, and national cancer incidence, mortality, years of life lost, years lived with disability, and disability-Adjusted life-years for 29 cancer groups, 1990 to 2017 : A systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study

Importance: Cancer and other noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) are now widely recognized as a threat to global development. The latest United Nations high-level meeting on NCDs reaffirmed this observation and also highlighted the slow progress in meeting the 2011 Political Declaration on the Prevention and Control of Noncommunicable Diseases and the third Sustainable Development Goal. Lack of situational analyses, priority setting, and budgeting have been identified as major obstacles in achieving these goals. All of these have in common that they require information on the local cancer epidemiology. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study is uniquely poised to provide these crucial data. Objective: To describe cancer burden for 29 cancer groups in 195 countries from 1990 through 2017 to provide data needed for cancer control planning. Evidence Review: We used the GBD study estimation methods to describe cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-Adjusted life-years (DALYs). Results are presented at the national level as well as by Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a composite indicator of income, educational attainment, and total fertility rate. We also analyzed the influence of the epidemiological vs the demographic transition on cancer incidence. Findings: In 2017, there were 24.5 million incident cancer cases worldwide (16.8 million without nonmelanoma skin cancer [NMSC]) and 9.6 million cancer deaths. The majority of cancer DALYs came from years of life lost (97%), and only 3% came from years lived with disability. The odds of developing cancer were the lowest in the low SDI quintile (1 in 7) and the highest in the high SDI quintile (1 in 2) for both sexes. In 2017, the most common incident cancers in men were NMSC (4.3 million incident cases); tracheal, bronchus, and lung (TBL) cancer (1.5 million incident cases); and prostate cancer (1.3 million incident cases). The most common causes of cancer deaths and DALYs for men were TBL cancer (1.3 million deaths and 28.4 million DALYs), liver cancer (572000 deaths and 15.2 million DALYs), and stomach cancer (542000 deaths and 12.2 million DALYs). For women in 2017, the most common incident cancers were NMSC (3.3 million incident cases), breast cancer (1.9 million incident cases), and colorectal cancer (819000 incident cases). The leading causes of cancer deaths and DALYs for women were breast cancer (601000 deaths and 17.4 million DALYs), TBL cancer (596000 deaths and 12.6 million DALYs), and colorectal cancer (414000 deaths and 8.3 million DALYs). Conclusions and Relevance: The national epidemiological profiles of cancer burden in the GBD study show large heterogeneities, which are a reflection of different exposures to risk factors, economic settings, lifestyles, and access to care and screening. The GBD study can be used by policy makers and other stakeholders to develop and improve national and local cancer control in order to achieve the global targets and improve equity in cancer care. © 2019 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.Peer reviewe

Mapping development and health effects of cooking with solid fuels in low-income and middle-income countries, 2000-18 : a geospatial modelling study

Background More than 3 billion people do not have access to clean energy and primarily use solid fuels to cook. Use of solid fuels generates household air pollution, which was associated with more than 2 million deaths in 2019. Although local patterns in cooking vary systematically, subnational trends in use of solid fuels have yet to be comprehensively analysed. We estimated the prevalence of solid-fuel use with high spatial resolution to explore subnational inequalities, assess local progress, and assess the effects on health in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) without universal access to clean fuels.Methods We did a geospatial modelling study to map the prevalence of solid-fuel use for cooking at a 5 km x 5 km resolution in 98 LMICs based on 2.1 million household observations of the primary cooking fuel used from 663 population-based household surveys over the years 2000 to 2018. We use observed temporal patterns to forecast household air pollution in 2030 and to assess the probability of attaining the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) target indicator for clean cooking. We aligned our estimates of household air pollution to geospatial estimates of ambient air pollution to establish the risk transition occurring in LMICs. Finally, we quantified the effect of residual primary solid-fuel use for cooking on child health by doing a counterfactual risk assessment to estimate the proportion of deaths from lower respiratory tract infections in children younger than 5 years that could be associated with household air pollution.Findings Although primary reliance on solid-fuel use for cooking has declined globally, it remains widespread. 593 million people live in districts where the prevalence of solid-fuel use for cooking exceeds 95%. 66% of people in LMICs live in districts that are not on track to meet the SDG target for universal access to clean energy by 2030. Household air pollution continues to be a major contributor to particulate exposure in LMICs, and rising ambient air pollution is undermining potential gains from reductions in the prevalence of solid-fuel use for cooking in many countries. We estimated that, in 2018, 205000 (95% uncertainty interval 147000-257000) children younger than 5 years died from lower respiratory tract infections that could be attributed to household air pollution.Interpretation Efforts to accelerate the adoption of clean cooking fuels need to be substantially increased and recalibrated to account for subnational inequalities, because there are substantial opportunities to improve air quality and avert child mortality associated with household air pollution. Copyright (C) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.Peer reviewe

The global, regional, and national burden of adult lip, oral, and pharyngeal cancer in 204 countries and territories:A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

Importance Lip, oral, and pharyngeal cancers are important contributors to cancer burden worldwide, and a comprehensive evaluation of their burden globally, regionally, and nationally is crucial for effective policy planning.Objective To analyze the total and risk-attributable burden of lip and oral cavity cancer (LOC) and other pharyngeal cancer (OPC) for 204 countries and territories and by Socio-demographic Index (SDI) using 2019 Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors (GBD) Study estimates.Evidence Review The incidence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) due to LOC and OPC from 1990 to 2019 were estimated using GBD 2019 methods. The GBD 2019 comparative risk assessment framework was used to estimate the proportion of deaths and DALYs for LOC and OPC attributable to smoking, tobacco, and alcohol consumption in 2019.Findings In 2019, 370 000 (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 338 000-401 000) cases and 199 000 (95% UI, 181 000-217 000) deaths for LOC and 167 000 (95% UI, 153 000-180 000) cases and 114 000 (95% UI, 103 000-126 000) deaths for OPC were estimated to occur globally, contributing 5.5 million (95% UI, 5.0-6.0 million) and 3.2 million (95% UI, 2.9-3.6 million) DALYs, respectively. From 1990 to 2019, low-middle and low SDI regions consistently showed the highest age-standardized mortality rates due to LOC and OPC, while the high SDI strata exhibited age-standardized incidence rates decreasing for LOC and increasing for OPC. Globally in 2019, smoking had the greatest contribution to risk-attributable OPC deaths for both sexes (55.8% [95% UI, 49.2%-62.0%] of all OPC deaths in male individuals and 17.4% [95% UI, 13.8%-21.2%] of all OPC deaths in female individuals). Smoking and alcohol both contributed to substantial LOC deaths globally among male individuals (42.3% [95% UI, 35.2%-48.6%] and 40.2% [95% UI, 33.3%-46.8%] of all risk-attributable cancer deaths, respectively), while chewing tobacco contributed to the greatest attributable LOC deaths among female individuals (27.6% [95% UI, 21.5%-33.8%]), driven by high risk-attributable burden in South and Southeast Asia.Conclusions and Relevance In this systematic analysis, disparities in LOC and OPC burden existed across the SDI spectrum, and a considerable percentage of burden was attributable to tobacco and alcohol use. These estimates can contribute to an understanding of the distribution and disparities in LOC and OPC burden globally and support cancer control planning efforts