RESUMO
Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 are at increased risk of thrombosis, acute respiratory distress syndrome and death. The optimal dosage of thromboprophylaxis is unknown. The aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tinzaparin in prophylactic, intermediate, and therapeutic doses in non-critical patients admitted for COVID-19 pneumonia. PROTHROMCOVID is a randomized, unblinded, controlled, multicenter trial enrolling non-critical, hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients were randomized to prophylactic (4500 IU), intermediate (100 IU/kg), or therapeutic (175 IU/kg) groups. All tinzaparin doses were administered once daily during hospitalization, followed by 7 days of prophylactic tinzaparin at discharge. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite endpoint of symptomatic systemic thrombotic events, need for invasive or non-invasive mechanical ventilation, or death within 30 days. The main safety outcome was major bleeding at 30 days. Of the 311 subjects randomized, 300 were included in the prespecified interim analysis (mean [SD] age, 56.7 [14.6] years; males, 182 [60.7%]). The composite endpoint at 30 days from randomization occurred in 58 patients (19.3%) of the total population; 19 (17.1 %) in the prophylactic group, 20 (22.1%) in the intermediate group, and 19 (18.5%) in the therapeutic dose group (p = 0.72). No major bleeding event was reported; non-major bleeding was observed in 3.7% of patients, with no intergroup differences. Due to these results and the futility analysis, the trial was stopped. In non-critically ill COVID-19 patients, intermediate or full-dose tinzaparin compared to standard prophylactic doses did not appear to affect the risk of thrombotic event, non-invasive ventilation, or mechanical ventilation or death. Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT04730856). Edura-CT registration number: 2020-004279-42.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Invasive fungal infection, particularly intraabdominal candidiasis, exerts a negative impact on the outcome of pancreas transplant recipients (PTRs). Optimal antifungal prophylaxis in this context remains unclear. METHODS: We performed a single-centre retrospective study to compare the incidence of invasive candidiasis during the first 6 post-transplant months in a cohort of 218 PTRs over two periods in which different agents for antifungal prophylaxis were used: fluconazole (Fluco-Px) from March 1995 to June 2012, and micafungin followed by fluconazole (Mica-Px) from July 2012 to December 2018. RESULTS: A total of 152 and 66 PTRs received Fluco-Px and Mica-Px. Mean age was 39.7 ± 7.8 years, 56.4% (123/218) were males, and 85.3% (186/218) underwent simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation. Invasive candidiasis occurred in 21.7% (33/152) of PTRs under Fluco-Px compared to 24.2% (16/66) of those under Mica-Px (p-value = .681). Median time from transplantation to infection was 8 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 6-16) under Fluco-Px versus 6.5 (IQR: 3.3-15.8) under Mica-Px (p-value = .623). Non-albicans Candida species comprised 27.5% (11/40) and 25.0% (4/16) of episodes under Fluco-Px and Mica-Px respectively (p-value = .849). Surgical site infection was the most common form in both groups (82.5% [33/40] and 87.5% [14/16]; p-value = .954). Multivariable analysis identified cold ischaemia time of the pancreas and kidney grafts, surgical reintervention and insulin requirement after transplantation as risks factor for invasive candidiasis. CONCLUSION: This retrospective study did not reveal a significant benefit from the initial use of micafungin-based antifungal prophylaxis over fluconazole among PTRs in terms of invasive candidiasis.
