Utilization Evaluation of Antimicrobial Agents in Neutropenic Cancer Patients in a Teaching hospital: Urgent of Drug Utilization Evaluation Studies

Background: More than 80% of patients with hematologic  malignancies will develop fever during more than one chemotherapy cycle combined with neutropenia. We aim to evaluate empiric antibiotic strategies in Febrile Neutropenic (FN) cancer patients. Methods: This is a concurrent study performed in the “Shahid Ghazi” teaching hospital, hematology-oncology center of Tabriz, Iran during the period of December 2011 to September2012. During this period, patients with FN were evaluated in view of antibiotics utilization based on Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA) and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) instructions. Results: Seventy patients had a total of 91 episodes of FN in the duration of this study. Among them 63 (90%) patients were the cases of acute leukemia. For 88 (96.7 %) patients, imipenem was used as the initial empirical antibiotic regimen. It was changed to piperacillin/tazobactam in 8 (8.8%) of them without indication. Cultures didn’t obtain before the initiation of empirical therapy in 19 (20.9%) episodes. Empiric vancomycin didn’t discontinue after 3 days even if it was not warranted in 23 episodes. In 16 cases vancomycin was switched to teicoplanin. The fluconazole dosages generally given to patients were all suboptimal. Adjusting the dosages of vancomycin or imipenem was not done correctly in 13 (14.29%) episodes. Conclusion: The results of this study showed that choosing antimicrobial agents and their dosing for prophylaxis and treatment of FN patients and discharge antimicrobial planning of FN patients do not follow the evaluated guidelines. Drug Usage Evaluation studies need to be done regularly in such a center

Long and Short-term Metformin Consumption as a Potential Therapy to Prevent Complications of COVID-19

Purpose: The aim of the study is to evaluate the effect of metformin in complication improvement of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Methods: This was a randomized clinical trial that involved 189 patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection. Patients in the intervention group received metformin-500 mg twice daily. Patients who received metformin before admission were excluded from the control group. Patients who were discharged before taking at least 2000 mg of metformin were excluded from the study. Primary outcomes were vital signs, need for ICU admission, need for intubation, and mortality. Results: Data showed that patients with diabetes with previous metformin in their regimen had lower percentages of ICU admission and death in comparison with patients without diabetes (11.3% vs. 26.1% (P=0.014) and 4.9% vs. 23.9% (P≤0.001), respectively). Admission time characteristics were the same for both groups except for diabetes and hyperlipidemia, which were significantly different between the two groups. Observations of naproxen consumption on endpoints, duration of hospitalization, and the levels of spO2 did not show any significant differences between the intervention and the control group. The adjusted OR for intubation in the intervention group versus the control group was 0.21 [95% CI, 0.04-0.99 (P=0.047)]. Conclusion: In this trial, metformin consumption had no effect on mortality and ICU admission rates in non-diabetic patients. However, metformin improved COVID-19 complications in diabetic patients who had been receiving metformin prior to COVID-19 infection, and it significantly lowered the intubation rates

Effect of Intermediate-Dose vs Standard-Dose Prophylactic Anticoagulation on Thrombotic Events, Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Treatment, or Mortality among Patients with COVID-19 Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit: The INSPIRATION Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance: Thrombotic events are commonly reported in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Limited data exist to guide the intensity of antithrombotic prophylaxis. Objective: To evaluate the effects of intermediate-dose vs standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation among patients with COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter randomized trial with a 2 � 2 factorial design performed in 10 academic centers in Iran comparing intermediate-dose vs standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation (first hypothesis) and statin therapy vs matching placebo (second hypothesis; not reported in this article) among adult patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19. Patients were recruited between July 29, 2020, and November 19, 2020. The final follow-up date for the 30-day primary outcome was December 19, 2020. Interventions: Intermediate-dose (enoxaparin, 1 mg/kg daily) (n = 276) vs standard prophylactic anticoagulation (enoxaparin, 40 mg daily) (n = 286), with modification according to body weight and creatinine clearance. The assigned treatments were planned to be continued until completion of 30-day follow-up. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of venous or arterial thrombosis, treatment with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or mortality within 30 days, assessed in randomized patients who met the eligibility criteria and received at least 1 dose of the assigned treatment. Prespecified safety outcomes included major bleeding according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (type 3 or 5 definition), powered for noninferiority (a noninferiority margin of 1.8 based on odds ratio), and severe thrombocytopenia (platelet count <20 �103/µL). All outcomes were blindly adjudicated. Results: Among 600 randomized patients, 562 (93.7) were included in the primary analysis (median interquartile range age, 62 50-71 years; 237 42.2% women). The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 126 patients (45.7%) in the intermediate-dose group and 126 patients (44.1%) in the standard-dose prophylaxis group (absolute risk difference, 1.5% 95% CI,-6.6% to 9.8%; odds ratio, 1.06 95% CI, 0.76-1.48; P =.70). Major bleeding occurred in 7 patients (2.5%) in the intermediate-dose group and 4 patients (1.4%) in the standard-dose prophylaxis group (risk difference, 1.1% 1-sided 97.5% CI,-� to 3.4%; odds ratio, 1.83 1-sided 97.5% CI, 0.00-5.93), not meeting the noninferiority criteria (P for noninferiority >.99). Severe thrombocytopenia occurred only in patients assigned to the intermediate-dose group (6 vs 0 patients; risk difference, 2.2% 95% CI, 0.4%-3.8%; P =.01). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19, intermediate-dose prophylactic anticoagulation, compared with standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation, did not result in a significant difference in the primary outcome of a composite of adjudicated venous or arterial thrombosis, treatment with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or mortality within 30 days. These results do not support the routine empirical use of intermediate-dose prophylactic anticoagulation in unselected patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04486508. © 2021 American Medical Association. All rights reserved

predict symptoms of depression based on cognitive flexibility, rumination and mindfulness in students

Introduction: This study aimed to predict symptoms of depression based on cognitive flexibility, rumination and mindfulness of students. Method: This design of current study was of descriptive correlational type. The study population consisted of all students enrolled in 2014-2015 school year in Tabriz Azad University, among which 180 were selected by random cluster sampling. Subjects completed cognitive flexibility Inventory (CFI), the Beck Depression Inventory 2 (BDI-II), rumination (RRS) and the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory. Multiple regression analysis was used to analyze the data. Results: The results showed that there is a significant negative correlation between cognitive flexibility and its subsets with depression (P<0.001), and there was a significant positive correlation between rumination and depression (P<0.001). The relationship between mindfulness and depression was significant and negative (P<0.001). The results of regression analysis showed that these variables explain 57% of depression. Discussion: The results of this study have therapeutic implications based on Cognitive Flexibility Training through cognitive behavioral therapy, as well as Mindfulness Training, on rumination reduction and depression symptoms

Atorvastatin versus Placebo in ICU Patients with COVID-19: Ninety-day Results of the INSPIRATION-S Trial

BACKGROUND: In the INSPIRATION-S trial, atorvastatin versus placebo was associated with a nonsignificant 16% reduction in 30-day composite of venous/arterial thrombosis or death in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with COVID-19. Thrombo-inflammatory response in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may last beyond the first 30 days. METHODS: This article reports the effects of atorvastatin 20 mg daily versus placebo on 90-day clinical and functional outcomes from INSPIRATION-S, a double-blind multicenter randomized trial of adult ICU patients with COVID-19. The main outcome for this prespecified study was a composite of adjudicated venous/arterial thrombosis, treatment with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), or all-cause mortality. Functional status was assessed with the Post-COVID-19 Functional Scale. RESULTS: In the primary analysis, 587 patients were included (age: 57 [Q1-Q3: 45-68] years; 44% women). By 90-day follow-up, the main outcome occurred in 96 (33.1%) patients assigned to atorvastatin and 113 (38.0%) assigned to placebo (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60-1.05, p = 0.11). Atorvastatin in patients who presented within 7 days of symptom onset was associated with reduced 90-day hazard for the main outcome (HR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.42-0.86, p $_{interaction}$ = 0.02). Atorvastatin use was associated with improved 90-day functional status, although the upper bound CI crossed 1.0 (OR$_{ordinal}$: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.41-1.01, p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Atorvastatin 20 mg compared with placebo did not significantly reduce the 90-day composite of death, treatment with ECMO, or venous/arterial thrombosis. However, the point estimates do not exclude a potential clinically meaningful treatment effect, especially among patients who presented within 7 days of symptom onset (NCT04486508)