Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis of early studies on ivermectin in SARS-CoV-2 infection

Ivermectin, an antiparasitic drug, has been repurposed for COVID-19 treatment during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Although its antiviral efficacy was confirmed early in vitro and in preclinical studies, its clinical efficacy remained ambiguous. Our purpose was to assess the efficacy of ivermectin in terms of time to viral clearance based on the meta-analysis of available clinical trials at the closing date of the data search period, one year after the start of the pandemic. This meta-analysis was reported by following the PRISMA guidelines and by using the PICO format for formulating the question. The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO. Embase, MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), bioRvix, and medRvix were searched for human studies of patients receiving ivermectin therapy with control groups. No language or publication status restrictions were applied. The search ended on 1/31/2021 exactly one year after WHO declared the public health emergency on novel coronavirus. The meta-analysis of three trials involving 382 patients revealed that the mean time to viral clearance was 5.74 days shorter in case of ivermectin treatment compared to the control groups [WMD = -5.74, 95% CI (-11.1, -0.39), p = 0.036]. Ivermectin has significantly reduced the time to viral clearance in mild to moderate COVID-19 diseases compared to control groups. However, more eligible studies are needed for analysis to increase the quality of evidence of ivermectin use in COVID-19

Standardized assessment of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in breast cancer: an evaluation of inter-observer agreement between pathologists

<p><b>Introduction:</b> In breast cancer, there is a growing body of evidence that tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) may have clinical utility and may be able to direct clinical decisions for subgroups of patients. Clinical utility is, however, not sufficient for warranting the implementation of a new biomarker in the routine practice, and evaluation of the analytical validity is needed, including testing the reproducibility of decentralized assessment of TILs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the inter-observer agreement of TILs assessment using a standardized method, as proposed by the International TILs Working Group 2014, applied to a cohort of breast cancers reflecting an average breast cancer population.</p> <p><b>Material and methods:</b> Stromal TILs were assessed using full slide sections from 124 breast cancers with varying histology, malignancy grade and ER- and HER2 status. TILs were estimated by nine dedicated breast pathologists using scanned hematoxylin–eosin stainings. TILs results were categorized using various cutoffs, and the inter-observer agreement was evaluated using the intraclass coefficient (ICC), Kappa statistics as well as individual overall agreements with the median value of TILs.</p> <p><b>Results:</b> Evaluation of TILs led to an ICC of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.65–0.77) corresponding to an acceptable agreement. Kappa values were in the range of 0.38–0.46 corresponding to a fair to moderate agreement. The individual agreements increased, when using only two categories (‘high’ vs. ‘low’ TILs) and a cutoff of 50–60%.</p> <p><b>Discussion:</b> The results of the present study are in accordance with previous studies, and shows that the proposed methodology for standardized evaluation of TILs renders an acceptable inter-observer agreement. The findings, however, indicate that assessment of TILs needs further refinement, and is in support of the latest St. Gallen Consensus, that routine reporting of TILs for early breast cancer is not ready for implementation in a clinical setting.</p