Oral Doxycycline Compared to Intravenous Ceftriaxone in the Treatment of Lyme Neuroborreliosis: A Multicenter, Equivalence, Randomized, Open-label Trial.

BACKGROUND: Lyme neuroborreliosis (LNB) is often treated with intravenous ceftriaxone even if doxycycline is suggested to be noninferior to ceftriaxone. We evaluated the efficacy of oral doxycycline in comparison to ceftriaxone in the treatment of LNB. METHODS: Patients with neurological symptoms suggestive of LNB without other obvious reasons were recruited. The inclusion criteria were (1) production of Borrelia burgdorferi-specific antibodies in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) or serum; (2) B. burgdorferi DNA in the CSF; or (3) an erythema migrans during the past 3 months. Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either oral doxycycline 100 mg twice daily for 4 weeks, or intravenous ceftriaxone 2 g daily for 3 weeks. The participants described their subjective condition with a visual analogue scale (VAS) from 0 to 10 (0 = normal; 10 = worst) before the treatment, and 4 and 12 months after the treatment. The primary outcome was the change in the VAS score at 12 months. RESULTS: Between 14 September 2012 and 28 December 2017, 210 adults with suspected LNB were assigned to receive doxycycline (n = 104) or ceftriaxone (n = 106). The per-protocol analysis comprised 82 patients with doxycycline and 84 patients with ceftriaxone. The mean change in the VAS score was -3.9 in the doxycycline group and -3.8 in the ceftriaxone group (mean difference, 0.17 [95% confidence interval, -.59 to .92], which is within the prespecified equivalence margins of -1 to 1 units). Participants in both groups improved equally. CONCLUSIONS: Oral doxycycline is equally effective as intravenous ceftriaxone in the treatment of LNB. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT01635530 and EudraCT 2012-000313-37.

Effectiveness and safety of dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors in the management of type 2 diabetes in older adults: a systematic review and development of recommendations to reduce inappropriate prescribing.

BACKGROUND: Preventable drug-related hospital admissions can be associated with drugs used in diabetes and the benefits of strict diabetes control may not outweigh the risks, especially in older populations. The aim of this study was to look for evidence on risks and benefits of DPP-4 inhibitors in older adults and to use this evidence to develop recommendations for the electronic decision support tool of the PRIMA-eDS project. METHODS: Systematic review using a staged approach which searches for systematic reviews and meta-analyses first, then individual studies only if prior searches were inconclusive. The target population were older people (≥65 years old) with type 2 diabetes. We included studies reporting on the efficacy and/or safety of DPP-4 inhibitors for the management of type 2 diabetes. Studies were included irrespective of DPP-4 inhibitors prescribed as monotherapy or in combination with any other drug for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. The target intervention was DPP-4 inhibitors compared to placebo, no treatment, other drugs to treat type 2 diabetes or a non-pharmacological intervention. RESULTS: Thirty studies (reported in 33 publications) were included: 1 meta-analysis, 17 intervention studies and 12 observational studies. Sixteen studies were focused on older adults and 14 studies reported subgroup analyses in participants ≥65, ≥70, or ≥75 years. Comorbidities were reported by 26 studies and frailty or functional status by one study. There were conflicting findings regarding the effectiveness of DPP-4 inhibitors in older adults. In general, DPP-4 inhibitors showed similar or better safety than placebo and other antidiabetic drugs. However, these safety data are mainly based on short-term outcomes like hypoglycaemia in studies with HbA1c control levels recommended for younger people. One recommendation was developed advising clinicians to reconsider the use of DPP-4 inhibitors for the management of type 2 diabetes in older adults with HbA1c <8.5% because of scarce data on clinically relevant benefits of their use. Twenty-two of the included studies were funded by pharmaceutical companies and authored or co-authored by employees of the sponsor. CONCLUSIONS: Other than the surrogate endpoint of improved glycaemic control, data on clinically relevant benefits of DPP-4 inhibitors in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in older adults is scarce. DPP-4 inhibitors might have a lower risk of hypoglycaemia compared to other antidiabetic drugs but data show conflicting findings for long-term benefits. Further studies are needed that evaluate the risks and benefits of DPP-4 inhibitors for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus in older adults, using clinically relevant outcomes and including representative samples of older adults with information on their frailty status and comorbidities. Studies are also needed that are independent of pharmaceutical company involvement.

T cell immunity following COVID-19 vaccination in adult patients with primary antibody deficiency - a 22-month follow-up.

Primary antibody deficiencies, such as common variable immunodeficiency (CVID), are heterogenous disease entities consisting of primary hypogammaglobulinemia and impaired antibody responses to vaccination and natural infection. CVID is the most common primary immunodeficiency in adults, presenting with recurrent bacterial infections, enteropathy, autoimmune disorders, interstitial lung diseases and increased risk of malignancies. Patients with CVID are recommended to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2, but there are relatively few studies investigating humoral and cellular responses to immunization. We studied the dynamics of humoral and cell-mediated immunity responses up to 22 months in 28 patients with primary immunodeficiency and three patients with secondary immunodeficiency receiving ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines. Despite inadequate humoral response to immunization, we demonstrate a robust T cell activation likely protecting from severe COVID-19.