Oral status of older people in medium to long-stay health and social care setting: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Older patients who spend long periods hospitalized or those who are in a situation of institutionalization represent a risk group in this regard, as many of them suffer a degree of dependence and need help to perform the basic tasks of personal care. It is therefore important to learn more of the oral health status of this group of patients in order to make a proper assessment of the situation and to develop protocols for its management. The purpose of the study was to conduct a systematic review to ascertain the oral health status of older people patients admitted to institutions or hospitalized for a long period of time. METHODS: a systematic review of the literature published in two different databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) was carried out, with 12 different combinations of keywords based on the following selection criteria: studies published in the last 5 years, in English and/or Spanish and/or Portuguese, with samples of ≥30 patients, performed in patients older than 65 years, admitted to any type of institution and/or hospital center for at least 7 days and in which the state of hard and/or soft tissues of the oral cavity were evaluated in some way. The selected articles were subjected to a thorough analysis. RESULTS: The search strategy covered 1.014 articles: 689 from Pubmed and 325 from Cochrane Library. After applying the eligibility criteria, five articles were selected for our review. The level of evidence of the articles was, a sample of 773 patients most of them were women with an average age older than 70 years old. CONCLUSIONS: The oral health of patients aged more than 65 is worse than that of the rest population. Long hospital stays or being institutionalized in a residence makes this group susceptible to a worsening of their oral health status. It is necessary to develop protocols for the oral health care of these patients, accompanied by training programs for the personnel responsible.

The risk of hepatic adverse events of systemic medications for psoriasis: a prospective cohort study using the BIOBADADERM registry.

BACKGROUND: Limited information is available regarding the risk of incident liver disease in patients with psoriasis receiving systemic therapies. OBJECTIVES: To describe the liver safety findings of conventional and modern systemic therapies for moderate-to-severe psoriasis, and to compare the relative incidence rates of hepatic adverse events (AEs) for each drug. METHODS: All the patients on the BIOBADADERM registry were included. Crude and adjusted incidence rate ratios (cIRR and aIRR, respectively) of hepatic AEs, using anti-TNF drugs as reference, were determined. Outcomes of interest were hypertransaminasemia, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NADFLD) and a group of other, less represented, hepatic AEs. RESULTS: Our study included 3,171 patients exposed to systemic drugs (6279 treatment cycles). Incident hypertransaminasemia was the most frequent hepatic AE (incidence rate of 21 per 1000 patients-years [CI 95% 18-23]), followed by NAFLD (8 cases per 1000 patients-years [95% CI 6-10]). Methotrexate (aIRR 3.06 [2.31-4.4]; p = 0.000) and cyclosporine (aIRR 2.37 [1.05-5.35]; p = .0378) were associated with an increased risk for hypertransaminasemia when compared to anti-TNF-α agents. No differences were observed between different groups of biologics. Conventional therapies were not associated with new incident NAFLD. CONCLUSIONS: Comparative information of the incidence of hepatic AEs could facilitate drug selection in moderate-to-severe psoriasis.

In Vitro Study of Synergic Effect of Cisplatin and Low Molecular Weight Heparin on Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the possible synergic effect of cisplatin and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) on oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cisplatin and enoxaparin sodium, alone or in combination, were administered at doses of 1, 2, 4, 8 and 10 µM and 0.1, 0.5, 1, 5, 10, 50, and 100 µg/ml, respectively, to the H357 human OSCC line. The effects on cell viability and apoptosis were evaluated after 24, 48, and 72 h and on cell migration after 18 and 24 h. RESULTS: 10 µM concentration of cisplatin produced the greatest decrease in cell viability, with significant differences at 24 (p=0.009), 48 (p=0.001) and 72 h (p = 0.003); the 100 µg/ml dose of enoxaparin produced the greatest decrease in cell viability but without significant differences (p>0.05). When different concentrations of cisplatin and enoxaparin were combined, it was found that 100 µg/ml enoxaparin sodium produced the greatest synergic effect on cell viability reduction. In analyses of apoptosis and cell migration, it was found that the combination of cisplatin at 8 or 10 µM and 100 µg/ml enoxaparin produced a higher rate of apoptosis at 24, 48, and 72 h and a greater reduction in cell migration at 18 and 24 h. CONCLUSIONS: A combination of cisplatin and enoxaparin sodium shows a synergic effect that reduces cell viability and cell migration capacity and increases the apoptosis of human OSCC cells. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Enoxaparin may be beneficial in chemotherapy for patients with OSCC; this finding requires further clinical and laboratory investigation.

Development of clinical prediction models for good or bad response to classic systemic drugs, anti-TNFs, and ustekinumab in psoriasis, based on the BIOBADADERM cohort.

BACKGROUND: Identifying patients likely to have very good or bad results from systemic psoriasis therapy could improve efficiency of therapy. OBJECTIVE: To develop prognostic models for good or bad response to classic systemic drugs, anti-TNFs, and ustekinumab in psoriasis. METHODS: Multivariable logistic regression of a prospective multicenter cohort of psoriatic patients in clinical practice (6449 person-years of follow-up). We used as possible predictors demographic characteristics, comorbidities, characteristics of the psoriasis (type, PASI, arthritis), history of past therapy at entry in the cohort, and history of response to previous cycles while in the cohort. We defined good response to a treatment cycle as either cycle end due to disease remission or a cycle longer than 2 years that does not end later due to inefficacy in the follow-up period. Bad response to a treatment cycle was defined as a cycle that is finished due to inefficacy, based on the physician judgment, after more than 3 months of treatment. RESULTS: Patients with fewer previous therapies, lower body mass index, older at start of therapy, and with previous history of good responses to therapy are more likely to have positive results of therapy. However, the predictive characteristics of models are poor. CONCLUSION: Predictive models of clinical response to systemic drugs in psoriasis with the studied variables do not seem to outperform drug selection by a dermatologist.