Genotypic and Epidemiologic Profiles of Giardia duodenalis in Four Brazilian Biogeographic Regions

Human infections with gut protozoan parasites are neglected and not targeted by specific control initiatives, leading to a knowledge gap concerning their regional diversity and epidemiology. The present study aims to explore Giardia duodenalis genetic diversity and assess the epidemiologic scenario of subclinical infections in different Brazilian biogeographic regions. Cross-sectional surveys (n = 1334 subjects) were conducted in four municipalities in order to obtain fecal samples and socioenvironmental data. Microscopy of non-diarrheal feces and nucleotide sequencing of a ß-giardin gene fragment were performed. From a total of 51 samples that could be sequenced, 27 (52.9%) ß-giardin sequences were characterized as assemblage A and 24 (47.1%) as assemblage B. In the Amazon, assemblage B was the most frequently detected, predominantly BIII, and with two novel sub-assemblages. Assemblage A predominated in the extra-Amazon region, with five novel sub-assemblages. Prevalence reached 17.8% (64/360) in the Amazon, 8.8% (48/544) in the Atlantic Forest, 7.4% (22/299) in Cerrado and 2.3% (3/131) in the Semiarid. People living in poverty and extreme poverty presented significantly higher positivity rates. In conclusion, subclinical giardiasis is endemic in Brazilian communities in different biogeographic regions, presenting high genetic diversity and a heterogeneous genotypic distribution.

Infections with Giardia duodenalis and Entamoeba histolytica/Entamoeba dispar as Hidden and Prevalent Conditions in Periurban Communities in the State of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

This study aims to assess the prevalence, distribution, and etiological profile of intestinal parasitism in children living in periurban areas in Cachoeiras de Macacu, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. A community-based cross-sectional survey (n = 479) was carried out. Prevalence of infection with G. duodenalis and E. histolytica/E. dispar was 8.6% (n = 41) and 13.4% (n = 64), respectively. Infection with G. duodenalis was significantly more frequent among children living in poor families (24/187 (12.8%) vs. 16/272 (5.9%); prevalence ratio (PR) = 2.18; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.19-3.99; p=0.011). This difference was also significant for infection with any pathogenic parasite (43/187 (23%) vs. 40/272 (14/7%); PR = 1.56; 95% CI = 1.06-2.30; p=0.026). In addition, people residing in houses with more than four inhabitants showed significantly higher positivity for infections with G. duodenalis and with E. histolytica/E. dispar (22/138 (15.9%) vs. 16/311 (5.1%); PR = 3.09; 95% CI = 1.68-5.71; p < 0.001 for G. duodenalis and 32/138 (23.2%) vs. 30/311 (9.6%); PR = 2.40; 95% CI = 1.52-3.79; p < 0.001 for E. histolytica/E. dispar). Laboratory diagnosis of protozoan enteric infections and effective drugs for their treatment are unmet goals in the primary health care system. Therefore, giardiasis and amebiasis are neglected conditions.

[Morphine as first medication for treatment of cancer pain]. / Morfina como primeiro medicamento para tratamento da dor de câncer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The medications used according to the recommendation of the World Health Organization do not promote pain relief in a number of patients with cancer pain. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of morphine as first medication for the treatment of moderate cancer pain in patients with advanced and/or metastatic disease, as an option to the recommendations of the World Health Organization analgesic ladder. METHOD: Sixty patients without opioid therapy, with ≥18 years of age, were randomized into two groups. G1 patients received medication according to the analgesic ladder and started treatment with non-opioids in the first, weak opioids in the second, and strong opioids in the third step; G2 patients received morphine as first analgesic medication. The efficacy and tolerability of initial use of morphine were evaluated every two weeks for three months. RESULTS: The groups were similar with respect to demographic data. There was no significant difference between the groups regarding pain intensity, quality of life, physical capacity, satisfaction with treatment, need for complementation and dose of morphine. In G1 there was a higher incidence of nausea (p=0.0088), drowsiness (p=0.0005), constipation (p=0.0071) and dizziness (p=0.0376) in the second visit and drowsiness (p=0.05) in the third. CONCLUSIONS: The use of morphine as first medication for pain treatment did not promote better analgesic effect than the ladder recommended by World Health Organization, with higher incidence of adverse effects.

Morphine as first medication for treatment of cancer pain.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: the medications used according to the recommendation of the World Health Organization do not promote pain relief in a number of patients with cancer pain. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of morphine as first medication for the treatment of moderate cancer pain in patients with advanced and/or metastatic disease, as an option to the recommendations of the World Health Organization analgesic ladder. METHOD: sixty patients without opioid therapy, with ≥18 years of age, were randomized into two groups. G1 patients received medication according to the analgesic ladder and started treatment with non-opioids in the first, weak opioids in the second, and strong opioids in the third step; G2 patients received morphine as first analgesic medication. The efficacy and tolerability of initial use of morphine were evaluated every two weeks for three months. RESULTS: the groups were similar with respect to demographic data. There was no significant difference between the groups regarding pain intensity, quality of life, physical capacity, satisfaction with treatment, need for complementation and dose of morphine. In G1 there was a higher incidence of nausea (p=0.0088), drowsiness (p=0.0005), constipation (p=0.0071) and dizziness (p=0.0376) in the second visit and drowsiness (p=0.05) in the third. CONCLUSIONS: the use of morphine as first medication for pain treatment did not promote better analgesic effect than the ladder recommended by World Health Organization, with higher incidence of adverse effects.

Morphine as first medication for treatment of cancer pain / Morfina como primeiro medicamento para tratamento da dor de câncer / Morfina como primer medicamento para el tratamiento del dolor de cáncer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: the medications used according to the recommendation of the World Health Organization do not promote pain relief in a number of patients with cancer pain. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of morphine as first medication for the treatment of moderate cancer pain in patients with advanced and/or metastatic disease, as an option to the recommendations of the World Health Organization analgesic ladder. METHOD: sixty patients without opioid therapy, with >18 years of age, were randomized into two groups. G1 patients received medication according to the analgesic ladder and started treatment with non-opioids in the first, weak opioids in the second, and strong opioids in the third step; G2 patients received morphine as first analgesic medication. The efficacy and tolerability of initial use of morphine were evaluated every two weeks for three months. RESULTS: the groups were similar with respect to demographic data. There was no significant difference between the groups regarding pain intensity, quality of life, physical capacity, satisfaction with treatment, need for complementation and dose of morphine. In G1 there was a higher incidence of nausea (p = 0.0088), drowsiness (p = 0.0005), constipation (p = 0.0071) and dizziness (p = 0.0376) in the second visit and drowsiness (p = 0.05) in the third. CONCLUSIONS: the use of morphine as first medication for pain treatment did not promote better analgesic effect than the ladder recommended by World Health Organization, with higher incidence of adverse effects. .

JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: Os medicamentos usados segundo a recomendação da Organização Mundial de Saúde (OMS) não promovem alívio da dor de uma parcela dos pacientes com dor oncológica. O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar o uso de morfina como primeiro medicamento para o tratamento da dor oncológica moderada, em pacientes com doença avançada e/ou metástases, como opção às recomendações da escada analgésica preconizada pela OMS. MÉTODO: Sessenta pacientes sem terapia com opioide, com idade maior ou igual a 18 anos, foram distribuídos aleatoriamente em dois grupos. Os pacientes do G1 receberam medicamentos segundo a escada analgésica e iniciaram o tratamento com não opioide no primeiro degrau, opioide fraco no segundo e opioide potente no terceiro; os do G2 receberam morfina como primeiro medicamento analgésico. Foram avaliadas a eficácia e a tolerabilidade do uso inicial de morfina, a cada duas semanas durante três meses. RESULTADOS: Os grupos foram semelhantes quanto aos dados demográficos. Não houve diferença significante entre os grupos quanto à intensidade da dor, qualidade de vida, capacidade física, satisfação com o tratamento, necessidade de complementação e dose de morfina usada. No G1 houve maior incidência de náusea (p = 0,0088), sonolência (p = 0,0005), constipação (p = 0,0071) e tontura (p = 0,0376) na segunda consulta e para sonolência (p = 0,05) na terceira. CONCLUSÕES: O uso de morfina como primeiro medicamento para tratamento da dor não promoveu melhor efeito analgésico do que a escada preconizada pela OMS e houve maior incidência de efeitos adversos. .

JUSTIFICACIÓN Y OBJETIVOS: los medicamentos usados según la recomendación de la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) no generan alivio del dolor de un grupo de pacientes con dolor oncológico. El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar el uso de la morfina como primer medicamento para el tratamiento del dolor oncológico moderado en pacientes con enfermedad avanzada y/o metástasis, como opción a las recomendaciones de la escala analgésica preconizada por la OMS. MÉTODO: sesenta pacientes sin terapia con opiáceos, con una edad mayor o igual a los 18 años, fueron distribuidos aleatoriamente en 2 grupos. Los pacientes del G1 recibieron medicamentos según la escala analgésica iniciando el tratamiento con no opiáceo en la primera etapa, opiáceo débil en la segunda y opiáceo potente en la tercera; los del G2 recibieron morfina como primer medicamento analgésico. Fueron evaluadas la eficacia y la tolerabilidad del uso inicial de la morfina cada 2 semanas durante 3 meses. RESULTADOS: los grupos fueron similares en cuanto a los datos demográficos. No hubo diferencia significativa entre los grupos en lo que respecta a la intensidad del dolor, calidad de vida, capacidad física, satisfacción con el tratamiento, necesidad de complementación y dosis de morfina usada. En el G1 hubo una mayor incidencia de náuseas (p = 0,0088), somnolencia (p = 0,0005), estreñimiento (p = 0,0071) y mareos (p = 0,0376) en la segunda consulta, y de somnolencia (p = 0,05) en la tercera. CONCLUSIONES: el uso de la morfina como primer medicamento para el tratamiento del dolor no generó un efecto analgésico mejor que la escala preconizada por la OMS, habiendo una mayor incidencia de efectos adversos. .