RESUMEN
Pirfenidone and Nintedanib are specific drugs used against idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) that showed efficacy in non-IPF fibrosing interstitial lung diseases (ILD). Both drugs have side effects that affect patients in different ways and have different levels of severity, making treatment even more challenging for patients and clinicians. The present review aims to assess the effectiveness and potential complications of Pirfenidone and Nintedanib treatment regimens across various ILD diseases. A detailed search was performed in relevant articles published between 2018 and 2023 listed in PubMed, UpToDate, Google Scholar, and ResearchGate, supplemented with manual research. The following keywords were searched in the databases in all possible combinations: Nintedanib; Pirfenidone, interstitial lung disease, and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. The most widely accepted method for evaluating the progression of ILD is through the decline in forced vital capacity (FVC), as determined by respiratory function tests. Specifically, a decrease in FVC over a 6-12-month period correlates directly with increased mortality rates. Antifibrotic drugs Pirfenidone and Nintedanib have been extensively validated; however, some patients reported several side effects, predominantly gastrointestinal symptoms (such as diarrhea, dyspepsia, and vomiting), as well as photosensitivity and skin rashes, particularly associated with Pirfenidone. In cases where the side effects are extremely severe and are more threatening than the disease itself, the treatment has to be discontinued. However, further research is needed to optimize the use of antifibrotic agents in patients with PF-ILDs, which could slow disease progression and decrease all-cause mortality. Finally, other studies are requested to establish the treatments that can stop ILD progression.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV) includes granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA), microscopic polyangiitis (MPA), and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA), all of which are characterised by inflammation of small-medium-sized vessels. Progressive understanding of these diseases has allowed researchers and clinicians to start discussing nailfold video capillaroscopy (NVC) as a future tool for many applications in daily practice. Today, NVC plays a well-established and validated role in differentiating primary from secondary Raynaud's phenomenon correlated with scleroderma. Nevertheless, there has not been sufficient attention paid to its real potential in the ANCA-associated vasculitis. In fact, the role of NVC in vasculitis has never been defined and studied in a multicentre and multinational study. In this review, we carried out a literature analysis to identify and synthesise the possible role of capillaroscopy for patients with ANCA-associated vasculitis. METHODS: Critical research was performed in the electronic archive (PUBMED, UpToDate, Google Scholar, ResearchGate), supplemented with manual research. We searched in these databases for articles published until November 2023. The following search words were searched in the databases in all possible combinations: capillaroscopy, video capillaroscopy, nailfold-video capillaroscopy, ANCA-associated vasculitis, vasculitis, granulomatosis with polyangiitis, EGPA, and microscopic polyangiitis. RESULTS: The search identified 102 unique search results. After the evaluation, eight articles were selected for further study. The literature reported that capillaroscopy investigations documented non-specific abnormalities in 70-80% of AAV patients. Several patients showed neoangiogenesis, capillary loss, microhaemorrhages, and bushy and enlarged capillaries as the most frequent findings. Furthermore, the difference between active phase and non-active phase in AAV patients was clearly discernible. The non-active phase showed similar rates of capillaroscopy alterations compared to the healthy subjects, but the active phase had higher rates in almost all common abnormalities instead. CONCLUSIONS: Microvascular nailfold changes, observed in patients affected by vasculitis, may correlate with the outcome of these patients. However, these non-specific abnormalities may help in the diagnosis of vasculitis. As such, new analysis analyses are necessary to confirm our results.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Dysregulated systemic inflammation is the primary driver of mortality in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. Current guidelines favour a 7-10-day course of any glucocorticoid equivalent to dexamethasone 6â mg daily. A comparative randomised controlled trial (RCT) with a higher dose and a longer duration of intervention was lacking. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, open-label RCT to investigate methylprednisolone 80â mg as a continuous daily infusion for 8â days followed by slow tapering versus dexamethasone 6â mg once daily for up to 10â days in adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia requiring oxygen or noninvasive respiratory support. The primary outcome was reduction in 28-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were mechanical ventilation-free days at 28â days, need for intensive care unit (ICU) referral, length of hospitalisation, need for tracheostomy, and changes in C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, arterial oxygen tension/inspiratory oxygen fraction (P aO2 /F IO2 ) ratio and World Health Organization Clinical Progression Scale at days 3, 7 and 14. RESULTS: 677 randomised patients were included. Findings are reported as methylprednisolone (n=337) versus dexamethasone (n=340). By day 28, there were no significant differences in mortality (35 (10.4%) versus 41 (12.1%); p=0.49) nor in median mechanical ventilation-free days (median (interquartile range (IQR)) 23 (14) versus 24 (16)â days; p=0.49). ICU referral was necessary in 41 (12.2%) versus 45 (13.2%) (p=0.68) and tracheostomy in 8 (2.4%) versus 9 (2.6%) (p=0.82). Survivors in the methylprednisolone group required a longer median (IQR) hospitalisation (15 (11) versus 14 (11)â days; p=0.005) and experienced an improvement in CRP levels, but not in P aO2 /F IO2 ratio, at days 7 and 14. There were no differences in disease progression at the prespecified time-points. CONCLUSION: Prolonged, higher dose methylprednisolone did not reduce mortality at 28â days compared with conventional dexamethasone in COVID-19 pneumonia.