RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: We studied the short- and long-term effects of imatinib in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Participants were randomized to receive standard of care (SoC) or SoC with imatinib. Imatinib dosage was 400 mg daily until discharge (max 14 days). Primary outcomes were mortality at 30 days and 1 year. Secondary outcomes included recovery, quality of life and long COVID symptoms at 1 year. We also performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials studying imatinib for 30-day mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. RESULTS: We randomized 156 patients (73 in SoC and 83 in imatinib). Among patients on imatinib, 7.2% had died at 30 days and 13.3% at 1 year, and in SoC, 4.1% and 8.2% (adjusted HR 1.35, 95% CI 0.47-3.90). At 1 year, self-reported recovery occurred in 79.0% in imatinib and in 88.5% in SoC (RR 0.91, 0.78-1.06). We found no convincing difference in quality of life or symptoms. Fatigue (24%) and sleep issues (20%) frequently bothered patients at one year. In the meta-analysis, imatinib was associated with a mortality risk ratio of 0.73 (0.32-1.63; low certainty evidence). CONCLUSIONS: The evidence raises doubts regarding benefit of imatinib in reducing mortality, improving recovery and preventing long COVID symptoms in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.
Asunto(s)
Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Hospitalización , Mesilato de Imatinib , Calidad de Vida , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , Mesilato de Imatinib/uso terapéutico , Femenino , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , COVID-19/mortalidad , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Resultado del Tratamiento , AdultoRESUMEN
Background and Objective: The European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC) published recommendations for postgraduate education in palliative medicine in 2009. However, it is currently unknown how the EAPC remommendations are implemented in national programs, as audits of them are lacking. In Finland, the national society of palliative medicine has been organizing postgraduate palliative medicine training for experienced physicians since 2008, but the program has not been audited. The aim of this study was to perform a comprehensive analysis of the program. Design: In 2018-2019, a questionnaire on the Finnish Training Program for Palliative Medicine Competence was sent to past participants and delivered in person to current trainees. Learning outcomes were assessed with validated instruments for received skills and attitudes. All available educational archives were examined as well. Results: Forty-five (32 %) out of 155 specialists and 13 (38 %) out of 34 trainees responded. According to their assessments, the training provided them well with most skills required to work as palliative care specialists, but poorly with research capabilities. However, the Finnish program covers the EAPC guidelines well. Problem-based education, group work, and clinical excursions have been added to the latest curriculum. Maturation through work is needed for administrative and consultant competences. Conclusion: The EAPC guidelines can be included in a national course. The course had an important positive influence on the attitudes and learning of physicians in palliative medicine. The development of the education would benefit from pedagogical consultation. Uniform standards for auditing national programs should be developed.