Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Mais filtros








Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Clin Transl Sci ; 7(1): e55, 2023.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37008615

RESUMO

Introduction: It is important for SARS-CoV-2 vaccine providers, vaccine recipients, and those not yet vaccinated to be well informed about vaccine side effects. We sought to estimate the risk of post-vaccination venous thromboembolism (VTE) to meet this need. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study to quantify excess VTE risk associated with SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in US veterans age 45 and older using data from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) National Surveillance Tool. The vaccinated cohort received at least one dose of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine at least 60 days prior to 3/06/22 (N = 855,686). The control group was those not vaccinated (N = 321,676). All patients were COVID-19 tested at least once before vaccination with a negative test. The main outcome was VTE documented by ICD10-CM codes. Results: Vaccinated persons had a VTE rate of 1.3755 (CI: 1.3752-1.3758) per thousand, which was 0.1 percent over the baseline rate of 1.3741 (CI: 1.3738-1.3744) per thousand in the unvaccinated patients, or 1.4 excess cases per 1,000,000. All vaccine types showed a minimal increased rate of VTE (rate of VTE per 1000 was 1.3761 (CI: 1.3754-1.3768) for Janssen; 1.3757 (CI: 1.3754-1.3761) for Pfizer, and for Moderna, the rate was 1.3757 (CI: 1.3748-1.3877)). The tiny differences in rates comparing either Janssen or Pfizer vaccine to Moderna were statistically significant (p < 0.001). Adjusting for age, sex, BMI, 2-year Elixhauser score, and race, the vaccinated group had a minimally higher relative risk of VTE as compared to controls (1.0009927 CI: 1.007673-1.0012181; p < 0.001). Conclusion: The results provide reassurance that there is only a trivial increased risk of VTE with the current US SARS-CoV-2 vaccines used in veterans older than age 45. This risk is significantly less than VTE risk among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. The risk-benefit ratio favors vaccination, given the VTE rate, mortality, and morbidity associated with COVID-19 infection.

2.
J Clin Transl Sci ; 6(1): e74, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35836784

RESUMO

Introduction: COVID-19 is a major health threat around the world causing hundreds of millions of infections and millions of deaths. There is a pressing global need for effective therapies. We hypothesized that leukotriene inhibitors (LTIs), that have been shown to lower IL6 and IL8 levels, may have a protective effect in patients with COVID-19. Methods: In this retrospective controlled cohort study, we compared death rates in COVID-19 patients who were taking a LTI with those who were not taking an LTI. We used the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Corporate Data Warehouse (CDW) to create a cohort of COVID-19-positive patients and tracked their use of LTIs between November 1, 2019 and November 11, 2021. Results: Of the 1,677,595 cohort of patients tested for COVID-19, 189,195 patients tested positive for COVID-19. Forty thousand seven hundred one were admitted. 38,184 had an oxygen requirement and 1214 were taking an LTI. The use of dexamethasone plus a LTI in hospital showed a survival advantage of 13.5% (CI: 0.23%-26.7%; p < 0.01) in patients presenting with a minimal O2Sat of 50% or less. For patients with an O2Sat of <60 and <50% if they were on LTIs as outpatients, continuing the LTI led to a 14.4% and 22.25 survival advantage if they were continued on the medication as inpatients. Conclusions: When combined dexamethasone and LTIs provided a mortality benefit in COVID-19 patients presenting with an O2 saturations <50%. The LTI cohort had lower markers of inflammation and cytokine storm.

3.
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg ; 164(5): 1318-1326.e3, 2022 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35469597

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) continues to be a major cause of cancer deaths. Previous investigation has suggested that metformin use can contribute to improved outcomes in NSCLC patients. However, this association is not uniform in all analyzed cohorts, implying that patient characteristics might lead to disparate results. Identification of patient characteristics that affect the association of metformin use with clinical benefit might clarify the drug's effect on lung cancer outcomes and lead to more rational design of clinical trials of metformin's utility as an intervention. In this study, we examined the association of metformin use with long-term mortality benefit in patients with NSCLC and the possible modulation of this benefit by body mass index (BMI) and smoking status, controlling for other clinical covariates. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study in which we analyzed data from the Veterans Affairs (VA) Tumor Registry in the United States. Data from all patients with stage I NSCLC from 2000 to 2016 were extracted from a national database, the Corporate Data Warehouse that captures data from all patients, primarily male, who underwent treatment through the VA health system in the United States. Metformin use was measured according to metformin prescriptions dispensed to patients in the VA health system. The association of metformin use with overall survival (OS) after diagnosis of stage I NSCLC was examined. Patients were further stratified according to BMI and smoking status (previous vs current) to examine the association of metformin use with OS across these strata. RESULTS: Metformin use was associated with improved survival in patients with stage I NSCLC (average hazard ratio, 0.82; P < .001). An interaction between the effect of metformin use and BMI on OS was observed (χ2 = 3268.42; P < .001) with a greater benefit of metformin use observed in patients as BMI increased. Similarly, an interaction between smoking status and metformin use on OS was also observed (χ2 = 2997.05; P < .001) with a greater benefit of metformin use observed in previous smokers compared with current smokers. CONCLUSIONS: In this large retrospective study, we showed that a survival benefit is enjoyed by users of metformin in a robust stage I NSCLC patient population treated in the VA health system. Metformin use was associated with an 18% improved OS. This association was stronger in patients with a higher BMI and in previous smokers. These observations deserve further mechanistic study and can help rational design of clinical trials with metformin in patients with lung cancer.


Assuntos
Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Metformina , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/patologia , Humanos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/patologia , Masculino , Metformina/uso terapêutico , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Modelos de Riscos Proporcionais , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos
4.
J Geriatr Cardiol ; 16(9): 706-709, 2019 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31645857

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating safety of warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) are lacking. METHODS & RESULTS: All patients (n = 196,521) receiving care at veteran's affairs with active cancer and AF from 2010-2015 were included. One-year mortality was significantly higher in unadjusted analysis with warfarin (44.9%) compared to dabigatran (25%, P < 0.001), rivaroxaban (24.4%, P < 0.001) and apixaban (30%, P < 0.001) and after adjusting for age, sex and type of cancer mortality (OR = 2.66, 95% CI: 2.52-2.82, P < 0.001). Risk of ischemic stroke (13.5% vs. 11.1%, 12.0%, 14.0%) was similar, however risk of hemorrhagic stroke was significantly higher among patients receiving warfarin (1.2%) compared to patients receiving dabigatran (0.5%), rivaroxaban (0.7%) and apixaban (0.8%) respectively, P = 0.04. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated the superior safety profile of DOACs compared to warfarin among patients with underlying cancer and AF. Warfarin was associated with higher mortality, similar ischemic stroke risk but higher risk of hemorrhagic stroke.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA