Methodological and Reporting Quality of Noninferiority Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing Antiretroviral Therapies: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether the reporting quality of antiretroviral (ARV) noninferiority (NI) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) has improved since the CONSORT guideline release in 2006. The primary objective of this systematic review was assessing the methodological and reporting quality of ARV NI-RCTs. We also assessed reporting quality by funding source and publication year. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central from inception to 14 November 2022. We included NI-RCTs comparing ≥2 ARV regimens used for human immunodeficiency virus treatment or prophylaxis. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool to assess risk of bias. Screening and data extraction were performed blinded and in duplicate. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize data; statistical tests were 2 sided, with significance defined as P < .05. The systematic review was prospectively registered (PROSPERO CRD42022328586), and not funded. RESULTS: We included 160 articles reporting 171 trials. Of these articles, 101 (63.1%) did not justify the NI margin used, and 28 (17.5%) did not provide sufficient information for sample size calculation. Eighty-nine of 160 (55.6%) reported both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses, while 118 (73.8%) described missing data handling. Ten of 171 trials (5.9%) reported potentially misleading results. Pharmaceutical industry-funded trials were more likely to be double-blinded (28.1% vs 10.3%; P = .03) and to describe missing data handling (78.5% vs 59.0%; P = .02). The overall risk of bias was low in 96 of 160 studies (60.0%). CONCLUSIONS: ARV NI-RCTs should improve NI margin justification, reporting of intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses, and missing data handling to increase CONSORT adherence.

Characteristics of mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients in the Al-Ahsa Region of Saudi Arabia: a retrospective study with survival analysis.

BACKGROUND: About 5-10% of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infected patients require critical care hospitalization and a variety of respiratory support, including invasive mechanical ventilation. Several nationwide studies from Saudi Arabia have identified common comorbidities but none were focused on mechanically ventilated patients in the Al-Ahsa region of Saudi Arabia. OBJECTIVES: Identify characteristics and risk factors for mortality in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review SETTING: Two general hospitals in the Al-Ahsa region of Saudi Arabia PATIENTS AND METHODS: We included mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients (>18 years old) admitted between 1 May and 30 November 2020, in two major general hospitals in the Al-Ahsa region, Saudi Arabia. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize patients. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards (CPH) model was used exploratively to identify hazard ratios (HR) of predictors of mortality. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient characteristics, mortality rate, extubation rate, the need for re-intubation and clinical complications during hospitalization. SAMPLE SIZE AND CHARACTERISTICS: 154 mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients with median (interquartile range) age of 60 (22) years; 65.6% male. RESULTS: Common comorbidities were diabetes (72.2%), hypertension (67%), cardiovascular disease (14.9%) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) (14.3%). In the multivariable CPH model, age >60 years old (HR=1.83, 95% CI 1.2-2.7, P=.002), CKD (1.61, 95% CI 0.9-2.6, P=.062), insulin use (HR=0.65, 95% CI 0.35-.08, P<.001), and use of loop diuretics (HR=0.51, 95% CI 0.4, P=.037) were major predictors of mortality. CONCLUSION: Common diseases in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients from the Al-Ahsa region were diabetes, hypertension, other cardiovascular diseases, and CKD in this exploratory analysis. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective, weak CPH model performance. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: None.

Early oral switch to combined cefixime therapy for management of osteoarticular infections in pediatric sickle cell disease patients: A descriptive analysis.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of osteoarticular infections in pediatric patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) is a challenging task for the practitioner. The aim of this study is to evaluate cefixime for the treatment of osteoarticular infections in pediatric SCD patients by retrospective design. METHODS: This study was done in the pediatric hospital of King Saud Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The data was obtained from medical records of patients aged 1-16 years admitted between January 2019 to December 2020, diagnosed with SCD and received cefixime for the treatment of OI. A descriptive study for pediatric patients admitted between January 2019 to December 2020 diagnosed with sickle cell disease and diagnosed with osteoarticular infection. All patients were treated with cefixime. Medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs) were used for the descriptive analysis. RESULTS: A total of 260 patients were screened, and 51 cases [osteomyelitis (OM), n = 43, and septic arthritis (SA), n = 8] met the inclusion criteria. The median age of OM patients was 7 years, with males making up 67.4% of the cohort. The median length of IV antibiotics and hospital stays were 10 days and 11 days, respectively. The median total duration of antibiotic use was 37 and 25 days for OM and SA, respectively. The treatment success rate was 88% in OM cases and 100% in SA patients. Readmission was noted in 39.5% of the OM patients, while only 25% of the SA patients were recorded for reinfection. CONCLUSION: The study's findings revealed that Cefixime is a viable oral alternative for treating osteoarticular infection in pediatric SCD patients. Nonetheless, a prospective investigation is required to corroborate the findings of this study.

Tocilizumab effectiveness in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients (T-MVC-19 Study): a multicenter real-world evidence.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of tocilizumab in mechanically ventilated patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This retrospective multicenter study included adults (≥18 years) diagnosed with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from nasopharyngeal swab, and requiring invasive mechanical ventilation during admission. Survival analyses with inverse propensity score treatment weighting (IPTW) and propensity score matching (PSM) were conducted. To account for immortal bias, we used Cox proportional modeling with time-dependent covariance. Competing risk analysis was performed for the extubation endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 556 (tocilizumab = 193, control = 363) patients were included. Males constituted the majority of the participants (69.2% in tocilizumab arm,74.1% in control arm). Tocilizumab was not associated with a reduction in mortality with hazard ratio [(HR) = 0.82,95% confidence interval (95%CI): 0.62-1.10] in the Inverse propensity score weighting (IPTW) analysis and (HR = 0.86,95% CI: 0.64-1.16) in the PSM analysis. However, tocilizumab was associated with an increased rate of extubation (33.6%) compared to the control arm (11.9%); subdistributional hazards (SHR) = 3.1, 95% CI: 1.86-5.16). CONCLUSIONS: Although tocilizumab was not found to be effective in reducing mortality, extubation rate while on mechanical ventilation was higher among tocilizumab treated group.