Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol ; 20(4): 275-292, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38568077

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Since COVID-19 patients are often polytreated, monitoring drug-drug interaction (DDIs) is necessary. We evaluated whether drugs used after the second COVID-19 pandemic wave were associated with DDI-related adverse events and the role of drug interaction checkers in identifying them. METHODS: The study (PROSPERO-ID: CRD42024507634) included: 1) consulting the drug interaction checkers Drugs.com, Liverpool COVID-19 Interactions, LexiComp, Medscape, and Micromedex; 2) systematic review; 3) reviewed studies analysis; 4) evaluating drug interaction checkers potential to anticipate DDI-related adverse events.The systematic review was performed searching PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane databases from 1 March 2022 to 11 November 2023. Observational studies, and clinical trials were included. Article without reporting direct association between DDIs and adverse events were excluded. The risk of bias was assessed by Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS: The most frequent DDIs involved nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (N/R) and fluvoxamine. Fifteen studies, including 150 patients and 35 DDI-related outcomes, were analyzed. The most frequent DDIs involved tacrolimus with N/R, resulting in creatinine increase.Eighty percent of reported DDI-related adverse events would have been identified by all drug-interaction checkers, while the remaining 20% by at least 2 of them. CONCLUSIONS: Drug interaction checkers are useful but show inconsistencies. Multiple sources are needed to tailor treatment in the context of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Drug Interactions , Humans , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Antiviral Agents/administration & dosage , COVID-19/epidemiology , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/epidemiology
2.
J Pers Med ; 13(2)2023 Feb 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36836568

ABSTRACT

More than two years after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare providers are facing an emergency within an emergency, the so-called long COVID or post-COVID-19 syndrome (PCS). Patients diagnosed with PCS develop an extended range of persistent symptoms and/or complications from COVID-19. The risk factors and clinical manifestations are many and various. Advanced age, sex/gender, and pre-existing conditions certainly influence the pathogenesis and course of this syndrome. However, the absence of precise diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers may further complicate the clinical management of patients. This review aimed to summarize recent evidence on the factors influencing PCS, possible biomarkers, and therapeutic approaches. Older patients recovered approximately one month earlier than younger patients, with higher rates of symptoms. Fatigue during the acute phase of COVID-19 appears to be an important risk factor for symptom persistence. Female sex, older age, and active smoking are associated with a higher risk of developing PCS. The incidence of cognitive decline and the risk of death are higher in PCS patients than in controls. Complementary and alternative medicine appears to be associated with improvement in symptoms, particularly fatigue. The heterogeneous nature of post-COVID symptoms and the complexity of patients with PCS, who are often polytreated due to concomitant clinical conditions, suggest a holistic and integrated approach to provide useful guidance for the treatment and overall management of long COVID.

3.
J Chemother ; 35(5): 383-396, 2023 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36102273

ABSTRACT

Remdesivir (RDV) is a broad-spectrum antiviral drug, now approved by Regulatory Agencies for COVID-19 treatment. RDV is associated with improvements in clinical outcomes, but no conclusive studies have shown an effect in reducing mortality. This study aimed to carry out a systematic review with meta-analysis to investigate whether RDV can significantly modify the outcome of COVID-19 patients evaluating its effects on mortality, length of stay, time to clinical improvement and need for oxygen supplementation. No significant improvement in terms of survival in patients treated with standard therapy (ST)+RDV as compared to ST alone (P = 0.24) was found. The duration of oxygen support was significantly lower in patients treated with ST + RDV compared with ST alone (P = 0.03). Further investigations should be planned to assess the real impact of RDV in the management of COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use
4.
Pharmaceuticals (Basel) ; 15(11)2022 Nov 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36355560

ABSTRACT

Hand-Foot syndrome (HFS) and diarrhoea are dose-limiting Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) of capecitabine-based chemotherapy. Four polymorphisms in the dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPYD) gene, encoding the DPD enzyme responsible for the metabolism of fluoropyrimidines, such as capecitabine, are strongly associated with severe ADRs, and their screening should be performed before starting treatment. Moreover, capecitabine-related toxicity may worsen due to drug-drug and drug-supplement interactions. Here we investigated factors responsible for severe HFS and diarrhoea presented by two patients, non-carriers of the recommended DPYD single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) but carriers of other genetic variants suggested to increase the risk of capecitabine-related ADRs. Through careful therapy recognition, we demonstrated that, unbeknownst to the oncologists, the patients were taking folic acid during the treatment with capecitabine at a dosage higher than 2000 mg/m2, which is the maximum tolerated dose when folate is administered. To resolve the ADRs, the therapy had to be drastically changed. In one case, dose reduction of capecitabine and discontinuation of lipid-lowering agents were carried out. In the other case, discontinuation of capecitabine and folic acid and capecitabine re-administration were performed after a month. Genetic and environmental factors should be considered good predictors of severe capecitabine-related toxicity. Medication reconciliation should be encouraged to avoid the harmful consequences of inappropriate treatments.

5.
J Pers Med ; 12(10)2022 Sep 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36294717

ABSTRACT

Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) are used in the prophylaxis and treatment of thromboembolic disorders. Despite a high efficacy, their narrow therapeutic window and high response variability hamper their management. Several patients experience fluctuations in dose−response and are at increased risk of over- or under-anticoagulation. Therefore, it is essential to monitor the prothrombin time/international normalized ratio to determine the so-called stable dose and to adjust the dosage accordingly. Three polymorphisms, CYP2C9∗2, CYP2C9∗3 and VKORC1-1639G>A, are associated with increased sensitivity to VKAs. Other polymorphisms are associated with a request for a higher dose and VKA resistance. We described the clinical cases of two patients who were referred to the Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacogenetics Unit of the University Hospital of Salerno for pharmacological counseling. One of them showed hypersensitivity and the other one was resistant to VKAs. A systematic review was performed to identify randomized clinical trials investigating the impact of pharmacogenetic testing on increased sensitivity and resistance to VKAs. Although international guidelines are available and information on the genotype-guided dosing approach has been included in VKA drug labels, VKA pharmacogenetic testing is not commonly required. The clinical cases and the results of the systematically reviewed RCTs demonstrate that the pharmacogenetic-based VKA dosing model represents a valuable resource for reducing VKA-associated adverse events.

6.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(4): e227970, 2022 04 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35438752

ABSTRACT

Importance: During the COVID-19 pandemic, urgent clinical management of patients has mainly included drugs currently administered for other diseases, referred to as repositioned drugs. As a result, some of these drugs have proved to be not only ineffective but also harmful because of adverse events associated with drug-drug interactions (DDIs). Objective: To identify DDIs that led to adverse clinical outcomes and/or adverse drug reactions in patients with COVID-19 by systematically reviewing the literature and assessing the value of drug interaction checkers in identifying such events. Evidence Review: After identification of the drugs used during the COVID-19 pandemic, the drug interaction checkers Drugs.com, COVID-19 Drug Interactions, LexiComp, Medscape, and WebMD were consulted to analyze theoretical DDI-associated adverse events in patients with COVID-19 from March 1, 2020, through February 28, 2022. A systematic literature review was performed by searching the databases PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane for articles published from March 1, 2020, through February 28, 2022, to retrieve articles describing actual adverse events associated with DDIs. The drug interaction checkers were consulted again to evaluate their potential to assess such events. Findings: The DDIs identified in the reviewed articles involved 46 different drugs. In total, 575 DDIs for 58 drug pairs (305 associated with at least 1 adverse drug reaction) were reported. The drugs most involved in DDIs were lopinavir and ritonavir. Of the 6917 identified studies, 20 met the inclusion criteria. These studies, which enrolled 1297 patients overall, reported 115 DDI-related adverse events: 15 (26%) were identifiable by all tools analyzed, 29 (50%) were identifiable by at least 1 of them, and 14 (24%) remained nonidentifiable. Conclusions and Relevance: The main finding of this systematic review is that the use of drug interaction checkers could have identified several DDI-associated adverse drug reactions, including severe and life-threatening events. Both the interactions between the drugs used to treat COVID-19 and between the COVID-19 drugs and those already used by the patients should be evaluated.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions , Databases, Factual , Drug Interactions , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics
7.
J Pers Med ; 11(7)2021 Jul 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34357095

ABSTRACT

Data supporting the use of Tocilizumab (TCZ) in COVID-19 are contrasting and inconclusive. This meta-analysis aimed to assess TCZ effectiveness in reducing the mortality rate in COVID-19 patients. PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane, WILEY, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched to evaluate observational studies and RCTs. The outcome was the mortality rate. Forty observational studies and seven RCTs, involving 9640 and 5556 subjects treated with Standard Therapy (ST) + TCZ or ST alone, respectively, were included. In patients treated with ST+TCZ, a higher survival (Log odds ratio = -0.41; 95% CI: -0.68 -0.14; p < 0.001) was found. Subgroups analyses were performed to better identify the possible interference of some parameters in modifying the efficacy of TCZ therapy on COVID-19 mortality. Separating observational from RCTs, no statistically significant (p = 0.70) TCZ-related reduction of mortality regarding RCTs was found, while a significant reduction (Log odds ratio = -0.52; 95% CI: -0.82 -0.22, p < 0.001) was achieved regarding the observational studies. Stratifying for the use of Invasive Mechanic Ventilation (IMV), a higher survival was found in patients treated with TCZ in the No-IMV and IMV groups (both p < 0.001), but not in the No-IMV/IMV group. Meta-regression analyses were also performed. The meta-analysis of observational studies reveals that TCZ is associated with reducing the mortality rate in both severe and critically ill patients. Although the largest RCT, RECOVERY, is in line with this result, the meta-analysis of RCTs failed to found any difference between ST + TCZ and ST. It is crucial to personalize the therapy considering the patients' characteristics.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...