RESUMO
SOURCE CITATION: Sommer I, Ledinger D, Thaler K, et al. Outpatient treatment of confirmed COVID-19: a living, rapid evidence review for the American College of Physicians (version 2). Ann Intern Med. 2023;176:1377-1385. 37722115.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Citidina , Hidroxilaminas , Lactamas , Leucina , Nitrilas , Pacientes Ambulatoriais , Prolina , Humanos , Antivirais/uso terapêutico , Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19 , Citidina/análogos & derivados , Ritonavir/uso terapêutico , SARS-CoV-2RESUMO
SOURCE CITATION: Writing Committee for the REMAP-CAP Investigators; Higgins AM, Berry LR, Lorenzi E, et al. Long-term (180-day) outcomes in critically ill patients with COVID-19 in the REMAP-CAP randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2023;329:39-51. 36525245.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Humanos , Estado Terminal , Receptores de Interleucina-6RESUMO
SOURCE CITATION: Gottlieb RL, Vaca CE, Paredes R, et al. Early remdesivir to prevent progression to severe Covid-19 in outpatients. N Engl J Med. 2022;386:305-15. 34937145.
Assuntos
Monofosfato de Adenosina/farmacologia , Alanina/farmacologia , Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19 , Monofosfato de Adenosina/análogos & derivados , Alanina/análogos & derivados , Hospitalização , Humanos , Pacientes Ambulatoriais , SARS-CoV-2RESUMO
BACKGROUND: It is uncertain if medical masks offer similar protection against COVID-19 compared with N95 respirators. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether medical masks are noninferior to N95 respirators to prevent COVID-19 in health care workers providing routine care. DESIGN: Multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04296643). SETTING: 29 health care facilities in Canada, Israel, Pakistan, and Egypt from 4 May 2020 to 29 March 2022. PARTICIPANTS: 1009 health care workers who provided direct care to patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19. INTERVENTION: Use of medical masks versus fit-tested N95 respirators for 10 weeks, plus universal masking, which was the policy implemented at each site. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was confirmed COVID-19 on reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat analysis, RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 occurred in 52 of 497 (10.46%) participants in the medical mask group versus 47 of 507 (9.27%) in the N95 respirator group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.14 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.69]). An unplanned subgroup analysis by country found that in the medical mask group versus the N95 respirator group RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 occurred in 8 of 131 (6.11%) versus 3 of 135 (2.22%) in Canada (HR, 2.83 [CI, 0.75 to 10.72]), 6 of 17 (35.29%) versus 4 of 17 (23.53%) in Israel (HR, 1.54 [CI, 0.43 to 5.49]), 3 of 92 (3.26%) versus 2 of 94 (2.13%) in Pakistan (HR, 1.50 [CI, 0.25 to 8.98]), and 35 of 257 (13.62%) versus 38 of 261 (14.56%) in Egypt (HR, 0.95 [CI, 0.60 to 1.50]). There were 47 (10.8%) adverse events related to the intervention reported in the medical mask group and 59 (13.6%) in the N95 respirator group. LIMITATION: Potential acquisition of SARS-CoV-2 through household and community exposure, heterogeneity between countries, uncertainty in the estimates of effect, differences in self-reported adherence, differences in baseline antibodies, and between-country differences in circulating variants and vaccination. CONCLUSION: Among health care workers who provided routine care to patients with COVID-19, the overall estimates rule out a doubling in hazard of RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 for medical masks when compared with HRs of RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 for N95 respirators. The subgroup results varied by country, and the overall estimates may not be applicable to individual countries because of treatment effect heterogeneity. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, World Health Organization, and Juravinski Research Institute.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Dispositivos de Proteção Respiratória , Humanos , Respiradores N95 , SARS-CoV-2 , Máscaras , Canadá , Pessoal de SaúdeRESUMO
SOURCE CITATION: Voysey M, Clemens SA, Madhi SA, et al. Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK. Lancet. 2021;397:99-111. 33306989.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas , Adulto , Brasil , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , África do Sul , Reino UnidoRESUMO
SOURCE CITATION: Baden LR, El Sahly HM, Essink B, et al. Efficacy and safety of the mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:403-16. 33378609.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas , Adulto , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Humanos , RNA Mensageiro , SARS-CoV-2RESUMO
SOURCE CITATION: Polack FP, Thomas SJ, Kitchin N, et al. Safety and efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 vaccine. N Engl J Med. 2020;383:2603-15. 33301246.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas , Vacina BNT162 , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Humanos , RNA Mensageiro , SARS-CoV-2RESUMO
SOURCE CITATION: Yan D, Zhang X, Chen C, et al. Characteristics of viral shedding time in SARS-CoV-2 infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Public Health. 2021;9:652842. 33816427.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Humanos , Saúde Pública , SARS-CoV-2 , Eliminação de Partículas ViraisRESUMO
SOURCE CITATION: Madhi SA, Baillie V, Cutland CL, et al. Efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Covid-19 vaccine against the B.1.351 variant. N Engl J Med. 2021. [Epub ahead of print.] 33725432.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , África do SulRESUMO
SOURCE CITATION: WHO Rapid Evidence Appraisal for COVID-19 Therapies (REACT) Working Group; Shankar-Hari M, Vale CL, Godolphin PJ, et al. Association between administration of IL-6 antagonists and mortality among patients hospitalized for COVID-19: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 2021;326:499-518. 34228774.
Assuntos
Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19 , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/uso terapêutico , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2RESUMO
Necrotizing fasciitis, caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae, is an extremely rare and life-threatening bacterial soft tissue infection. We report a case of early necrotizing fasciitis associated with Streptococcus pneumoniae infection in a 26-year-old man who was immunocompromised with mixed connective tissue disease. The patient presented with acute, painful, erythematous, and edematous skin lesions of his right lower back, which rapidly progressed to the right knee. The patient underwent surgical exploration, and a diagnosis of necrotizing fasciitis was confirmed by pathological evidence of necrosis of the fascia and neutrophil infiltration in tissue biopsies. Cultures of fascial tissue biopsies and blood samples were positive for Streptococcus pneumoniae. To our knowledge, this is the first report of necrotizing fasciitis resulting from Streptococcus pneumoniae diagnosed at early phase; the patient recovered well without surgical debridement.
RESUMO
Melioidosis is an infection endemic to Southeast Asia and Northern Australia, and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The present report describes a case of chronic melioidosis in a returning traveller from the Philippines. Clinical suspicion of this illness is warranted in individuals with a history of travel to endemic regions. Safety in handling clinical specimens is paramount because laboratory transmission has been described.
La mélioïdose est une infection endémique en Asie du Sud-Est et en Australie occidentale. Elle s'associe à une morbidité et une mortalité importantes. Le présent rapport expose un cas de mélioïdose chronique chez un voyageur de retour des Philippines. La suspicion clinique de cette maladie s'impose chez les personnes qui ont voyagé dans des régions endémiques. Il est essentiel de respecter les règles de sécurité lors de la manipulation des échantillons cliniques, car des cas de transmission en laboratoire ont été signalés.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: In vitro data suggested reduced neutralizing capacity of sotrovimab, a monoclonal antibody, against Omicron BA.2 subvariant. However, limited in vivo data exist regarding clinical effectiveness of sotrovimab for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to Omicron BA.2. METHODS: A multicentre, retrospective cohort study was conducted at three Canadian academic tertiary centres. Electronic medical records were reviewed for patients ≥ 18 years with mild COVID-19 (sequencing-confirmed Omicron BA.1 or BA.2) treated with sotrovimab between February 1 to April 1, 2022. Thirty-day co-primary outcomes included hospitalization due to moderate or severe COVID-19; all-cause intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and all-cause mortality. Risk differences (BA.2 minus BA.1 group) for co-primary outcomes were adjusted with propensity score matching (e.g., age, sex, vaccination, immunocompromised status). RESULTS: Eighty-five patients were included (15 BA.2, 70 BA.1) with similar baseline characteristics between groups. Adjusted risk differences were non-statistically significant between groups for 30-day hospitalization (- 14.3%; 95% confidence interval (CI): - 32.6 to 4.0%), ICU admission (- 7.1%; 95%CI: - 20.6 to 6.3%), and mortality (- 7.1%; 95%CI: - 20.6 to 6.3%). CONCLUSIONS: No differences were demonstrated in hospitalization, ICU admission, or mortality rates within 30 days between sotrovimab-treated patients with BA.1 versus BA.2 infection. More real-world data may be helpful to properly assess sotrovimab's effectiveness against infections due to specific emerging COVID-19 variants.
Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados , Anticorpos Neutralizantes , COVID-19 , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Canadá , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: We report the final results of the clinical usage of ceftobiprole in patients in Canada from data in the national CLEAR (Canadian Le adership on Antimicrobial Real-Life Usage) registry. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The authors review the final data using the national ethics approved CLEAR study. Thereafter, the literature is surveyed regarding the usage of ceftobiprole to treat patients with infectious diseases via PubMed (up to March 2024). RESULTS: In Canada, ceftobiprole is primarily used as directed therapy to treat a variety of severe infections caused by MRSA. It is primarily used in patients failing previous antimicrobials, is frequently added to daptomycin and/or vancomycin with high microbiological and clinical cure rates, along with an excellent safety profile. Several reports attest to the microbiological/clinical efficacy and safety of ceftobiprole. Ceftobiprole is also reported to be used empirically in select patients with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP), as well as hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia (HABP). CONCLUSIONS: In Canada, ceftobiprole is used mostly as directed therapy to treat a variety of severe infections caused by MRSA, in patients failing previous antimicrobials. It is frequently added to, and thus used in combination with daptomycin and/or vancomycin with high microbiological/clinical cure rates, and an excellent safety profile.
Assuntos
Antibacterianos , Cefalosporinas , Humanos , Antibacterianos/administração & dosagem , Antibacterianos/farmacologia , Antibacterianos/efeitos adversos , Infecções Bacterianas/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções Bacterianas/microbiologia , Canadá , Cefalosporinas/administração & dosagem , Cefalosporinas/efeitos adversos , Cefalosporinas/farmacologia , Infecções Comunitárias Adquiridas/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções Comunitárias Adquiridas/microbiologia , Infecção Hospitalar/tratamento farmacológico , Infecção Hospitalar/microbiologia , Daptomicina/farmacologia , Daptomicina/administração & dosagem , Daptomicina/efeitos adversos , Staphylococcus aureus Resistente à Meticilina/efeitos dos fármacos , Sistema de Registros/estatística & dados numéricos , Vancomicina/administração & dosagem , Vancomicina/farmacologiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to examine the latest literature regarding the effectiveness of monoclonal antibodies as COVID-19 prophylaxis therapy for immunocompromised patient populations. METHODS: Literature review of published real-world and randomized control trials (RCTs) from 2020 to May 2023. RESULTS: COVID-19 is highly transmissible with potentially serious health outcomes, underscoring the need for effective prevention and treatment strategies. Vaccines are highly effective at preventing COVID-19 for the general population; however, efficacy is often impaired in immunocompromised patients given insufficient response to initial exposure and/or memory for secondary exposures. Some individuals may also have contraindications to vaccination. As such, additional protective measures are needed to bolster the immune response in these populations. Monoclonal antibodies have been effective at bolstering immune system responses to COVID-19 among immunocompromised patients; however, they are proving ineffective against the most recent Omicron strains (BA.4 and BA.5). CONCLUSION: Several studies have investigated the efficacy of monoclonal antibodies as pre- and post-prophylaxis for COVID-19. Historical evidence is promising; however, new variants of concern are proving challenging for currently available regimens.
Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais , COVID-19 , Humanos , Anticorpos Monoclonais/uso terapêutico , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Hospedeiro Imunocomprometido , Vacinação , Anticorpos Antivirais , Anticorpos NeutralizantesRESUMO
Background: Empirical use of antibiotics was reported throughout the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic; however, evidence of bacterial coinfection or secondary bacterial infection among COVID-19 patients was sparse. Antibiotic overprescription for COVID-19 patients without confirmed bacterial coinfection can increase antimicrobial resistance (AMR). The objective of this study is to assess the appropriateness of antibiotic use during COVID-19 by summarizing the frequency of antibiotic use among hospitalized COVID-19 and the frequency of antibiotic use in patients with COVID-19. Methods: A systematic search was conducted of the Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases by generating search terms using the concepts of "COVID-19," "Bacterial Coinfection," "Secondary bacterial infection," and "Antimicrobial resistance" to identify studies reporting antibiotic prescription for hospitalized COVID-19 patients with or without bacterial coinfection. We excluded studies on outpatients, studies informed infection due to mechanical ventilation, and randomized controlled trials. The pooled estimate of the percentage of the total and confirmed appropriate antibiotic prescriptions provided to hospitalized COVID-19 patients was generated using a random effect meta-analysis with inverse variance weighting. The study protocol registration DOI is osf.io/d3fpm. Results: Of 157,623 participants from 29 studies (11 countries, 45 % women) included in our review, antibiotics were prescribed to 67 % of participants (CI 64 %-71 %, P < 0·001), of which 80 % (CI 76 %-83 %, P < 0·001) of prescriptions were for COVID-19 patients without confirmed bacterial coinfections. Antibiotic overprescription varied during different periods of the pandemic and between High-Income and Upper and Lower Middle-Income Countries. We found heterogeneity among the studies (I2 = 100 %). The risk of bias analysis showed that 100 % of the included studies had the proper sample framing, and we are at low risk of bias due to sampling. Discussion: We find greater than expected use of antibiotics to treat hospitalized COVID-19 patients without bacterial coinfections, which may contribute to AMR globally. Concrete guidelines for using antibiotics to treat COVID-19 patients, strict monitoring, and administering Antimicrobial Stewardship are needed to prevent overprescription.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir was approved for use in high-risk outpatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, patients with severe CKD were excluded from the phase 3 trial, and the drug is not recommended for those with GFR <30 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 . On the basis of available pharmacological data, we developed a modified low-dose regimen of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir 300/100 mg on day 1, followed by 150/100 mg daily from day 2 to 5. In this study, we report our experience with this modified dose regimen in dialysis patients in the Canadian province of Ontario. METHODS: We included dialysis patients who developed COVID-19 and were treated with the modified dose nirmatrelvir/ritonavir regimen during a 60-day period between April 1 and May 31, 2022. Details of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir use and outcomes were captured manually, and demographic data were obtained from a provincial database. Data are presented with descriptive statistics. The principal outcomes we describe are 30-day hospitalization, 30-day mortality, and required medication changes with the modified dose regimen. RESULTS: A total of 134 dialysis patients with COVID-19 received nirmatrelvir/ritonavir during the period of study. Fifty-six percent were men, and the mean age was 64 years. Most common symptoms were cough and/or sore throat (60%). Medication interactions were common with calcium channel blockers, statins being the most frequent. Most patients (128, 96%) were able to complete the course of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, and none of the patients who received nirmatrelvir/ritonavir died of COVID-19 in the 30 days of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: A modified dose of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir use was found to be safe and well tolerated, with no serious adverse events being observed in a small sample of maintenance dialysis patients.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Diálise Renal , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Antivirais/efeitos adversos , Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19 , Ontário , Pacientes Ambulatoriais , Ritonavir/efeitos adversosRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: The dosing interval of a primary vaccination series can significantly impact on vaccine immunogenicity and efficacy. The current study compared 3 dosing intervals for the primary vaccination series of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, on humoral immune response and durability against SARS-CoV-2 ancestral and Beta variants up to 9 months post immunization. METHODS: Three groups of age- and sex-matched healthcare workers (HCW) who received 2 primary doses of BNT162b2 separated by 35-days, 35-42 days or >42-days were enrolled. Vaccine induced antibody titers at 3 weeks, 3 and 6-9 months post-second dose were assessed. RESULTS: There were 309 age- and sex-matched HCW (mean age 43 [sd 13], 58% females) enrolled. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 binding (IgG, IgM, IgA) and neutralizing antibody titers showed significant waning in levels beyond 35 days post first dose. The second dose induced a significant rise in antibody titers, which peaked at 3 weeks and then declined at variable rates across groups. The magnitude, consistency and durability of response was greater for anti-Spike than anti-RBD antibodies; and for IgG than IgA or IgM. Compared to the shorter schedules, a longer interval of >42 days offered the highest binding and neutralizing antibody titers against SARS-CoV-2 ancestral and Beta (B1.351) variants beyond 3 months post-vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first comprehensive study to compare 3 dosing intervals for the primary vaccination of BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine implemented in the real world. These findings suggest that delaying the second dose beyond 42 days can potentiate and prolong the humoral response against ancestral and Beta variants of SARS-CoV-2 up to 9 months post-vaccination.