The Current Mismatch Between COVID-19 Clinical Trial Design and the Evolving Profile of Hospitalized Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

Evaluating 100 adult coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients at a Madrid hospital, we identified a mismatch between current clinical trial designs and the evolving profile of hospitalized patients. Most patients were ineligible due to design constraints, suggesting a need to rethink trial criteria for a more accurate representation of the hospitalized COVID-19 cohort.

Results of phase 2 randomized multi-center study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of infusion of memory T cells as adoptive therapy in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pneumonia and/or lymphopenia (RELEASE NCT04578210).

BACKGROUND AIMS: There are currently no effective anti-viral treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-hospitalized patients with hypoxemia. Lymphopenia is a biomarker of disease severity usually present in patients who are hospitalized. Approaches to increasing lymphocytes exerting an anti-viral effect must be considered to treat these patients. Following our phase 1 study, we performed a phase 2 randomized multicenter clinical trial in which we evaluated the efficacy of the infusion of allogeneic off-the-shelf CD45RA- memory T cells containing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific T cells from convalescent donors plus the standard of care (SoC) versus just the SoC treatment. METHODS: Eighty-four patients were enrolled in three Spanish centers. The patients were randomized into the infusion of 1 × 106/kg CD45RA- memory T cells or the SoC. We selected four unvaccinated donors based on the expression of interferon gamma SARS-CoV-2-specific response within the CD45RA- memory T cells and the most frequent human leukocyte antigen typing in the Spanish population. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 81 patients. The primary outcome for recovery, defined as the proportion of participants in each group with normalization of fever, oxygen saturation sustained for at least 24 hours and lymphopenia recovery through day 14 or at discharge, was met for the experimental arm. We also observed faster lymphocyte recovery in the experimental group. We did not observe any treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Adoptive cell therapy with off-the-shelf CD45RA- memory T cells containing SAR-CoV-2-specific T cells is safe, effective and accelerates lymphocyte recovery of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and/or lymphopenia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04578210.

Developments in pharmacogenetics, pharmacogenomics, and personalized medicine.

The development of Pharmacogenetics and Pharmacogenomics in Western Europe is highly relevant in the worldwide scenario. Despite the usually low institutional support, many research groups, composed of basic and clinical researchers, have been actively working for decades in this field. Their contributions made an international impact and paved the way for further studies and pharmacogenomics implementation in clinical practice. In this manuscript, that makes part of the Special Issue entitled Spanish Pharmacology, we present an analysis of the state of the art of Pharmacogenetics and Pharmacogenomics research in Europe, we compare it with the developments in Spain, and we summarize the most salient contributions since 1988 to the present, as well as recent developments in the clinical application of pharmacogenomics knowledge. Finally, we present some considerations on how we could improve translation to clinical practice in this specific scenario.

Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate/Emtricitabine and Baricitinib for Patients at High Risk of Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019: The PANCOVID Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to evaluate if patients with high risk for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) would benefit from treatment with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) followed by baricitinib in case of hypoxemia and systemic inflammation. METHODS: PANCOVID is an open-label, double-randomized, phase 3 pragmatic clinical trial including adults with symptomatic COVID-19 with ≥2 comorbidities or aged ≥60 years and was conducted between 10 October 2020 and 23 September 2021. In the first randomization, patients received TDF/FTC or no TDF/FTC. In the second randomization, patients with room air oxygen saturation <95% and at least 1 increased inflammatory biomarker received baricitinib plus dexamethasone or dexamethasone alone. The primary endpoint was 28-day mortality. Main secondary endpoint was 28-day disease progression or critical care unit admission or mortality. The trial was stopped before reaching planned sample size due to the decrease in the number of cases and a mortality rate substantially lower than expected. RESULTS: Of the 355 included participants, 97% were hospitalized at baseline. Overall, 28-day mortality was 3.1%. The 28-day mortality relative risk (RR) for participants treated with TDF/FTC was 1.76 (95% confidence interval [CI], .52-5.91; P = .379); it was 0.42 (95% CI, .11-1.59; P = .201) for those treated with baricitinib. The 28-day RR for the main secondary combined endpoint for participants treated with TDF/FTC was 0.95 (95% CI, .66-1.40; P = .774); it was 0.90 (95% CI, .61-1.33; P = .687) for those treated with baricitinib. CONCLUSIONS: Our results do not suggest a beneficial effect of TDF/FTC; nevertheless, they are compatible with the beneficial effect of baricitinib already established by other clinical trials. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: EudraCT: 2020-001156-18.

Prognostic Impact of Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase Germline Variants in Unresectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients Treated with Platin-Based Chemotherapy.

Platin-based chemotherapy is the standard treatment for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, resistance to this therapy is a major obstacle in successful treatment. In this study, we aimed to investigate the impact of several pharmacogenetic variants in patients with unresectable NSCLC treated with platin-based chemotherapy. Our results showed that DPYD variant carriers had significantly shorter progression-free survival and overall survival compared to DPYD wild-type patients, whereas DPD deficiency was not associated with a higher incidence of high-grade toxicity. For the first time, our study provides evidence that DPYD gene variants are associated with resistance to platin-based chemotherapy in NSCLC patients. Although further studies are needed to confirm these findings and explore the underlying mechanisms of this association, our results suggest that genetic testing of DPYD variants may be useful for identifying patients at a higher risk of platin-based chemotherapy resistance and might be helpful in guiding future personalized treatment strategies in NSCLC patients.

Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of BNT162b2 booster in ChAdOx1-S-primed participants (CombiVacS): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: To date, no immunological data on COVID-19 heterologous vaccination schedules in humans have been reported. We assessed the immunogenicity and reactogenicity of BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, BioNTech, Mainz, Germany) administered as second dose in participants primed with ChAdOx1-S (Vaxzevria, AstraZeneca, Oxford, UK). METHODS: We did a phase 2, open-label, randomised, controlled trial on adults aged 18-60 years, vaccinated with a single dose of ChAdOx1-S 8-12 weeks before screening, and no history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive either BNT162b2 (0·3 mL) via a single intramuscular injection (intervention group) or continue observation (control group). The primary outcome was 14-day immunogenicity, measured by immunoassays for SARS-CoV-2 trimeric spike protein and receptor binding domain (RBD). Antibody functionality was assessed using a pseudovirus neutralisation assay, and cellular immune response using an interferon-γ immunoassay. The safety outcome was 7-day reactogenicity, measured as solicited local and systemic adverse events. The primary analysis included all participants who received at least one dose of BNT162b2 and who had at least one efficacy evaluation after baseline. The safety analysis included all participants who received BNT162b2. This study is registered with EudraCT (2021-001978-37) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04860739), and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between April 24 and 30, 2021, 676 individuals were enrolled and randomly assigned to either the intervention group (n=450) or control group (n=226) at five university hospitals in Spain (mean age 44 years [SD 9]; 382 [57%] women and 294 [43%] men). 663 (98%) participants (n=441 intervention, n=222 control) completed the study up to day 14. In the intervention group, geometric mean titres of RBD antibodies increased from 71·46 BAU/mL (95% CI 59·84-85·33) at baseline to 7756·68 BAU/mL (7371·53-8161·96) at day 14 (p<0·0001). IgG against trimeric spike protein increased from 98·40 BAU/mL (95% CI 85·69-112·99) to 3684·87 BAU/mL (3429·87-3958·83). The interventional:control ratio was 77·69 (95% CI 59·57-101·32) for RBD protein and 36·41 (29·31-45·23) for trimeric spike protein IgG. Reactions were mild (n=1210 [68%]) or moderate (n=530 [30%]), with injection site pain (n=395 [88%]), induration (n=159 [35%]), headache (n=199 [44%]), and myalgia (n=194 [43%]) the most commonly reported adverse events. No serious adverse events were reported. INTERPRETATION: BNT162b2 given as a second dose in individuals prime vaccinated with ChAdOx1-S induced a robust immune response, with an acceptable and manageable reactogenicity profile. FUNDING: Instituto de Salud Carlos III. TRANSLATIONS: For the French and Spanish translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Analytical validation of a laboratory-development multigene pharmacogenetic assay.

OBJECTIVE: The implementation of pharmacogenetics (PGx) in clinical practice is an essential tool for personalized medicine. However, clinical laboratories must validate their procedures before being used to perform PGx studies in patients, in order to confirm that they are adequate for the intended purposes. METHODS: We designed a validation process for our in-house pharmacogenetic PCR-based method assay. RESULTS: The concordance to reference, repeatability and reproducibility was 100%. Sensitivity and specificity were 100% for the detection of variant diplotypes in CYP2C9, CYP3A5, TPMT, DPYD and UGT1A1 genes. The sensitivity was lower in the detection of CYP2C19 variants due to a limitation in the design that prevents the detection of CYP2C19 *2/*10 diplotype. CONCLUSIONS: The success of implementing clinical pharmacogenetic testing into routine clinical practice is dependent on the precision of genotyping. Limitations must be bearing in mind to guarantee the quality of PGx assays in clinical laboratory practice. We provided objective evidence that the necessary requirements in our laboratory-development assay were fulfilled.

Development and validation of a prediction model for 30-day mortality in hospitalised patients with COVID-19: the COVID-19 SEIMC score.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a prediction model of mortality in patients with COVID-19 attending hospital emergency rooms. DESIGN: Multivariable prognostic prediction model. SETTING: 127 Spanish hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Derivation (DC) and external validation (VC) cohorts were obtained from multicentre and single-centre databases, including 4035 and 2126 patients with confirmed COVID-19, respectively. INTERVENTIONS: Prognostic variables were identified using multivariable logistic regression. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Patients' characteristics in the DC and VC were median age 70 and 61 years, male sex 61.0% and 47.9%, median time from onset of symptoms to admission 5 and 8 days, and 30-day mortality 26.6% and 15.5%, respectively. Age, low age-adjusted saturation of oxygen, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, estimated glomerular filtration rate by the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation, dyspnoea and sex were the strongest predictors of mortality. Calibration and discrimination were satisfactory with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve with a 95% CI for prediction of 30-day mortality of 0.822 (0.806-0.837) in the DC and 0.845 (0.819-0.870) in the VC. A simplified score system ranging from 0 to 30 to predict 30-day mortality was also developed. The risk was considered to be low with 0-2 points (0%-2.1%), moderate with 3-5 (4.7%-6.3%), high with 6-8 (10.6%-19.5%) and very high with 9-30 (27.7%-100%). CONCLUSIONS: A simple prediction score, based on readily available clinical and laboratory data, provides a useful tool to predict 30-day mortality probability with a high degree of accuracy among hospitalised patients with COVID-19.

Health Care Workers' Reasons for Choosing Between Two Different COVID-19 Prophylaxis Trials in an Acute Pandemic Context: Single-Center Questionnaire Study.

BACKGROUND: In April 2020, two independent clinical trials to assess SARS-CoV-2 prophylaxis strategies among health care workers were initiated at our hospital: MeCOVID (melatonin vs placebo) and EPICOS (tenofovir disoproxil/emtricitabine vs hydroxychloroquine vs combination therapy vs placebo). OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the reasons why health care workers chose to participate in the MeCOVID and EPICOS trials, as well as why they chose one over the other. METHODS: Both trials were offered to health care workers through an internal news bulletin. After an initial screening visit, all subjects were asked to respond to a web-based survey. RESULTS: In the first month, 206 health care workers were screened and 160 were randomized. The survey participation was high at 73.3%. Health care workers cited "to contribute to scientific knowledge" (n=80, 53.0%), followed by "to avoid SARS-CoV-2 infection" (n=33, 21.9%) and "the interest to be tested for SARS-CoV-2" (n=28, 18.5%), as their primary reasons to participate in the trials. We observed significant differences in the expected personal benefits across physicians and nurses (P=.01). The vast majority of volunteers (n=202, 98.0%) selected the MeCOVID trial, their primary reason being their concern regarding adverse reactions to treatments in the EPICOS trial (n=102, 69.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Health care workers' reasons to participate in prophylaxis trials in an acute pandemic context appear to be driven largely by their desire to contribute to science and to gain health benefits. Safety outweighed efficacy when choosing between the two clinical trials.

Clinical trial to test the efficacy of melatonin in COVID-19.

The pharmacological properties of melatonin are well known. However, there is noticeable the lack of clinical trials that confirm the efficacy, security, absence of side effects in the short and long term, and the effective doses of melatonin. This point is especially important in diseases with high morbidity and mortality including COVID-19. There is not treatment for COVID-19, and several anti-inflammatory and antiviral molecules are being tested, and different vaccines are in preparation. Although the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is apparently improving, it is expected new resurges next fall. Thus, looking for an effective treatment of COVID-19 is mandatory. Melatonin has significant anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and mitochondrial protective effects, and its efficacy has been demonstrated in multiple experimental models of disease and in a clinical trial in sepsis. Because COVID-19 courses with a severe septic response, multiple reviews proposing melatonin as a treatment for COVID-19 have been published. Nevertheless, there is a lack of experimental and clinical data on the use of melatonin on SARS-CoV-2 infection. Accordingly, we designed a clinical trial with an injectable formulation of melatonin for intravenous perfusion in ICU patients suffering from COVID-19 that has been just approved by the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices (AEMPS). The trial will allow by the first time understand the doses and efficacy of melatonin against COVID-19.

Inhaled Methoxyflurane Provides Greater Analgesia and Faster Onset of Action Versus Standard Analgesia in Patients With Trauma Pain: InMEDIATE: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Emergency Departments.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The objective of the InMEDIATE study was to evaluate the change in intensity of traumatic pain over the first 20 min in adult patients treated with methoxyflurane versus standard analgesic treatment in Spain. This the first randomized, active-controlled, multicenter trial of methoxyflurane in the emergency setting in Europe. METHODS: This was a randomized, controlled study that enrolled adult patients with acute moderate to severe (score ≥4 on the 11-point Numeric Rating Scale) trauma-associated pain in 14 Spanish emergency departments. Patients were randomized 1:1 to methoxyflurane (up to 2×3 mL) or standard analgesic treatment. Coprimary endpoints were the change from baseline in Numeric Rating Scale pain intensity score during the first 20 minutes of treatment and time to first pain relief. RESULTS: Three hundred five patients were randomized (methoxyflurane 156; standard analgesic treatment 149). Most patients in the standard analgesic treatment group (70%) received intravenous first-step analgesics and 9.4% of patients were treated with opioids. Mean decrease from baseline in Numeric Rating Scale pain intensity score was greater for methoxyflurane than standard analgesic treatment at all points, with a significant treatment difference overall up to 20 minutes (repeated-measures model 2.47 versus 1.39; treatment difference 1.00; 95% confidence interval 0.84 to 1.32). Median time to first pain relief was significantly shorter for methoxyflurane than standard analgesic treatment (3 versus 10 minutes). Methoxyflurane achieved better patient and clinician ratings for pain control and comfort of treatment than standard analgesic treatment and exceeded patient and clinician expectations of treatment in, respectively, 77% and 72% of cases compared with 38% and 19% for standard analgesic treatment. CONCLUSION: These results support consideration of methoxyflurane as a nonnarcotic, easy-to-administer, rapid-acting, first-line alternative to currently available analgesic treatments for trauma pain.

A case-control study to assess the role of polyomavirus in transplant complications: Where do we stand?

PURPOSE: The study's aim was to assess whether polyomavirus DNAemia screening was associated with different outcomes in patients with positive viremia compared with negative viremia. METHODS: Case-control retrospective study of patients with polyomavirus DNAemia (viremia > 1000 copies/mL) matched 1:1 with controls. Control group consists of the patient who received a transplant immediately before or after each identified case and did have nil viremia. FINDING: Ultimately, 120 cases of BK polyomavirus (BKPyV) were detected and matched with 130 controls. Of these, 54 were adult kidney transplant recipients (KTRs), 43 were pediatric KTRs, and 23 were undergoing hemato-oncologic therapy, of which 20 were undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. The odds ratio (OR) for overall risk of poorer outcomes in cases versus controls was 16.07 (95% CI: 5.55-46.54). The unfavorable outcome of switching the immunosuppressive drug (ISD) (14/40,35%) was no different from that of those treated with reduced ISD doses (31/71, 43.6%, P = .250). Acute rejection or graft-versus-host disease, previous transplant, and intensity of immunosuppression (4 ISDs plus induction or conditioning) were risk factors for BKPyV-DNAemia (OR: 13.96, 95% CI: 11.25-15.18, P < .001; OR: 6.14, 95% CI: 3.91-8.80, P < .001; OR: 5.53, 95% CI: 3.37-7.30, P < .001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Despite viremia screening, dose reduction, and change in therapeutic protocol, patients with positive BKPyV-DNAemia present poorer outcomes and unfavorable results.

Zika Virus Screening among Spanish Team Members After 2016 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Olympic Games.

We evaluated the risk for the Spanish Olympic Team acquiring Zika virus in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, during 2016. We recruited 117 team members, and all tested negative for Zika virus. Lack of cases in this cohort supports the minimum risk estimates made before the Games.

Significant HLA class I type associations with aromatic antiepileptic drug (AED)-induced SJS/TEN are different from those found for the same AED-induced DRESS in the Spanish population.

Aromatic antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are among the drugs most frequently involved in severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs), such as Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), and drug reactions with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS). This study investigated the associations between the genetic polymorphisms of HLA class-I and AED-induced SCARs in the Spanish population. HLA class-I genotypes were determined in AED (phenytoin[PHT],lamotrigine[LTG],carbamazepine[CBZ],phenobarbital[PB])-induced SJS/TEN (n=15) or DRESS (n=12) cases included in the Spanish SCAR registry, PIELenRed. There were 3 control groups: (A)tolerant to a single AED, (B)tolerant to any AED, and (C)Spanish population controls. For SJS/TEN, concomitant HLA-A*02:01/Cw15:02 alleles were significantly associated with PHT-cases compared to control groups B and C [(B)odds ratio(OR):14.75, p=0.009;(C)OR:27.50, p<0.001], and were close to significance with respect to control group A (p=0.060). The genotype frequency of the HLA-B*38:01 was significantly associated with PHT-LTG-cases compared with the 3 groups of controls [(A)OR:12.86, p=0.012;(B)OR:13.81; p=0.002;(C)OR:14.35, p<0.001], and with LTG-cases [(A)OR:147.00, p=0.001;(B)OR:115.00, p<0.001;(C)OR:124.70, p<0.001]. We found the HLA-B*15:02 allele in a Spanish Romani patient with a CBZ-case. The HLA-A*11:01 was significantly associated with CBZ-cases [(A)OR:63.89, p=0.002;(B)OR:36.33, p=0.005;(C)OR:28.29, p=0.007]. For DRESS, the HLA-A*24:02 genotype frequency was statistically significant in the PHT-LTG-cases [(A)OR:22.56, p=0.003;(B)OR:23.50. p=0.001; (C)OR:33.25, p<0.001], and in the LTG-cases [(A),OR:49.00, p=0.015;(B)OR:27.77, p=0.005; (C)OR:34.53, p=0.002]. HLA-A*31:01 was significantly associated with the CBZ-cases [(A)OR:22.00, p=0.047;(B)OR:29.50, p=0.033;(C)OR:35.14, p=0.006]. In conclusion, we identified several significant genetic risk factors for the first time in the Spanish Caucasian population: HLA-A*02:01/Cw*15:02 combination as a risk factor for PHT-induced SJS/TEN, HLA-B*38:01 for LTG- and PHT- induced SJS/TEN, HLA-A*11:01 for CBZ-induced SJS/TEN, and HLA-A*24:02 for LTG- and PHT- induced DRESS. The strong association between HLA*31:01 and CBZ-DRESS in Europeans was confirmed in this study.

Eosinophilic drug reactions detected by a prospective pharmacovigilance programme in a tertiary hospital.

AIM: We conducted a prospective evaluation of all eosinophilic drug reactions (EDRs) through the Prospective Pharmacovigilance Program from Laboratory Signals at Hospital to find out the incidence and distribution of these entities in our hospital, their causative drugs, and predictors. METHODS: All peripheral eosinophilia >700 × 106  cells l-1 detected at admission or during hospitalisation, were prospectively monitored over 42 months. The spectrum of the localised or systemic manifestation of EDR, the incidence, the distribution of causative drugs, and the predictors were analysed. RESULTS: The incidence of EDR was 16.67 (95% Poisson confidence interval [CI]: 9.90-25.98) per 10 000 admissions. Of 274 cases of EDR, 154 (56.2%) cases in 148 patients were asymptomatic hypereosinophilia. In the remaining 120 (43.8%) cases, there was other involvement. Skin and soft tissue reactions were detected in 36 (13.1%) cases; visceral EDRs in 19(7.0%) cases; and drug-induced eosinophilic cutaneous and visceral manifestations were detected in the remaining 65 (23.7%) cases, 64 of which were potential drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS). After adjusting for age, sex, and hospitalisation wards, predictors of symptomatic eosinophilia were earlier onset of eosinophilia (hazard ratio [HR], 10.49; 95%CI: 3.13-35.16) higher eosinophil count (HR, 8.51; 95%CI: 3.28-22.08), and a delayed onset of corticosteroids (HR, 1.34; 95%CI: 1.01-1.73). A higher eosinophil count in patients with DRESS was significantly associated with greater impairment of liver function, prolonged hospitalisation, higher cumulative doses of corticosteroids, and if hypogammaglobinaemia was detected, a reactivation of human-herpesvirus 6 was subsequently detected. CONCLUSIONS: Half (53.3%, 64/120 cases) of symptomatic EDRs were potential DRESS. The main predictor of severity of EDR was an early severe eosinophilia.

Nonchemotherapy drug-induced agranulocytosis in children detected by a prospective pharmacovigilance program.

OBJECTIVES: A prospective evaluation of nonchemotherapy drug-induced agranulocytosis (DIA) cases, which are infrequent in the pediatric population. We characterize agranulocytosis cases and assess lab test differences between drug- and nondrug-induced agranulocytosis. METHODS: Through our Prospective Pharmacovigilance Program from Laboratory Signals at Hospital we detected pediatric agranulocytosis cases from July 2007 to December 2010. This program estimates the incidence, drug causality, clinical features, outcomes of DIA pediatric cases, and assesses laboratory differences with respect to non-DIA. RESULTS: We detected 662 agranulocytosis in 308 pediatric patients, of which 14 were caused by nonchemotherapy drugs. The incidence rate of DIA for 10,000 pediatric patients was 3.92 (Poisson 95% confidence interval 1.09-8.77); 78.6% of DIA cases occurred in patients younger than 3 years. The final outcome was recovery without sequela in all cases. The pharmacologic group most frequently implicated was antimicrobial drugs (11 drugs), 7 of which were beta-lactams. The drugs most frequently suspected were cefotaxime and vancomycin (3 cases each). We found 3 drugs (cloperastine, codeine, and enoxaparin) not previously described to induce DIA. Automatic linear modeling (n = 56, R2 = 45.2%) showed a significant inverse association with platelets (R2 = 17.5%), hemoglobin, and alanine transaminase, and a direct association with red cell distribution (R2 = 16.2%). A generalized linear model (Type III, n = 1188; DIA, n = 86; likelihood ratio chi-squared = 156.16) retained eosinophils (p <.001), platelets (p <.001), total serum proteins (p <.001), and hemoglobin (p =.039). CONCLUSIONS: We found a higher incidence of DIA in children than previously described. Our findings also suggest an immune-mediated destruction or myeloid toxicity, possibly facilitated by an increase in drug exposure.

Hepatotoxicity induced by acute and chronic paracetamol overdose in adults. Where do we stand?

Paracetamol (Acetaminophen) poisoning data can reveal the potential deficiencies of paracetamol poisoning management guidelines. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients >18years who were attended in the emergency department (ED) of a Spanish tertiary hospital, from 2005 to 2010 for suspected paracetamol overdose and who had measurable paracetamol concentrations. 208 patients suspected of paracetamol poisoning were identified. The annual incidence in the ED increased from 2.0 (95%-CI: 0.2-7.2) cases per 10,000 patients in 2005 to 3.4 (95%-CI: 1.1-8.8) in 2010. Only 7 of 98 patients (7.14%) with acute poisoning at toxic doses showed hepatotoxicity signs, 4 (57.1%) of whom presented acute liver failure (ALF) criteria, while 8 of 10 patients (80%) with chronic paracetamol poisoning at toxic doses presented hepatotoxicity and 3 (37.5%) with ALF criteria. The time required to find medical care was 9.0h for acute poisoning and 49.6h for chronic poisoning (p<0.001). We conclude that the incidence of suspected cases of paracetamol poisoning at our hospital is increasing. The majority of toxicity cases, including ALF, associated with the ingestion of paracetamol were due to chronic poisoning. This finding constitutes an important warning regarding paracetamol chronic poisoning, and clinicians should have a higher index of clinical suspicion for this entity.

Implementing pharmacogenetics in clinical trials: considerations about current methodological, ethical, and regulatory challenges.

INTRODUCTION: The implementation of pharmacogenetic analysis within clinical trials faces methodological, ethical, and regulatory challenges, as well as tackling the difficulty in obtaining actionable information with a sufficient level of evidence to enable its integration into routine clinical practice. AREAS COVERED: We discuss the current status of pharmacogenetics integration in clinical trials, underscore the associated challenges, and make some suggestions on the aspects to address in any clinical trial including a pharmacogenetic evaluation. We conducted a literature review, thoroughly reviewed the applicable regulations and available guidelines, and assessed the application dossiers submitted for evaluation to the Ethics committee of Hospital La Paz (Madrid, Spain) to extract information related to inclusion of pharmacogenetics evaluations. EXPERT OPINION: The integration of pharmacogenetics into clinical trials is becoming increasingly common. However, several regulatory, methodological and ethical aspects involved are insufficiently addressed. There is a need for specific and transparent guidelines that establish unified and compliant criteria for methodology, proper handling of samples in compliance with regulations, and the protection of data privacy and confidentiality. Participants should receive complete and appropriate information regarding the purpose, handling, storage, and transfer of their samples and data, and should have the right to decide about their processing.

ALDRESS: A Retrospective Pilot Study to Develop a Pharmacological Causality Algorithm for Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS).

Background: The drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome represents a severe form of drug hypersensitivity reaction characterized by significant morbidity, mortality, and long-term sequelae, coupled with limited therapeutic avenues. Accurate identification of the causative drug(s) is paramount for acute management, exploration of safe therapeutic alternatives, and prevention of future occurrences. However, the absence of a standardized diagnostic test and a specific causality algorithm tailored to DRESS poses a significant challenge in its clinical management. Methods: We conducted a retrospective case-control study involving 37 DRESS patients to validate a novel causality algorithm, the ALDRESS, designed explicitly for this syndrome, comparing it against the current standard algorithm, SEFV. Results: The ALDRESS algorithm showcased superior performance, exhibiting an 85.7% sensitivity and 93% specificity with comparable negative predictive values (80.6% vs. 97%). Notably, the ALDRESS algorithm yielded a substantially higher positive predictive value (75%) compared to SEFV (51.40%), achieving an overall accuracy rate of 92%. Conclusions: Our findings underscore the efficacy of the ALDRESS algorithm in accurately attributing causality to drugs implicated in DRESS syndrome. However, further validation studies involving larger, diverse cohorts are warranted to consolidate its clinical utility and broaden its applicability. This study lays the groundwork for a refined causality assessment tool, promising advancements in the diagnosis and management of DRESS syndrome.