Safety and efficacy of pre-exposure prophylaxis with tixagevimab/cilgavimab (Evusheld) in patients with glomerular diseases who received rituximab.

Background: Patients on B-cell-depleting agents may have a suboptimal response to vaccination, placing them at a higher risk of contracting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or suffering from a more severe prognosis. Indeed, available data on pre-exposure prophylaxis with tixagevimab/cilgavimab (Evusheld) in subjects with glomerular diseases (GDs) who received rituximab are limited. Methods: We conducted a prospective study analysing the safety and efficacy of tixagevimab/cilgavimab for pre-exposure prophylaxis in patients with GDs who received rituximab in the previous 12 months. The rates of symptomatic infections and hospitalizations were compared with those for patients with GD treated with rituximab who refused to receive tixagevimab/cilgavimab. Results: Tixagevimab/cilgavimab was administered to 22 patients (12 females, mean age 58.4 ± 19.6 years) with GD diagnoses including membranous nephropathy, lupus nephritis, anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis and focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. No patient treated with tixagevimab/cilgavimab experienced symptomatic infection with SARS-CoV-2 during the follow-up (mean observation time of follow-up was 112 ± 23 days), while 11 of 28 controls (39.3%) reported a symptomatic infection (P = .0001), requiring hospitalization in 2 cases. Reported adverse events were mild, namely self-limiting headache [4], discomfort at the injection site [3], flu-like symptoms/myalgia [3] and fever [1]. No serious adverse events (e.g. cardiac events, anaphylaxis) were reported. Conclusion: Pre-exposure prophylaxis with tixagevimab/cilgavimab seems safe and lowered the risk of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection by ≈40% in vaccinated subjects with GD who received anti-CD20 therapy. Possible applications in the subset of patients who need immunosuppressive therapy, especially with rituximab, in a pandemic setting might be envisaged.

Tailoring Tofacitinib Oral Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis: The TuTOR App.

To support the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients treated with tofacitinib, we designed the TuTOR (tailoring tofacitinib oral therapy in rheumatoid arthritis) mobile app. The impact of the app on medical adherence was evaluated using a crossover design alternating a paper-diary and the TuTOR App. Twenty patients with RA (mean age at inclusion, 59 ± 13 years) were included in the study. A statistically significant decrease in DAS28 was observed since the first month of therapy (mean DAS28 at baseline, 3.9 ± 1 vs. 1° month 3.1 ± 1, p = 0.0016). Similarly, the numerical rating scale (NRS) of perceived activity of disease and subjective fatigue progressively decreased. No differences were reported in DAS28 or NRS between the TuTOR app and the paper-diary groups. A significant decrease was observed in HAQ during the follow-up (baseline 1.38 ± 1.11 vs. six months 0.83 ± 0.9; p = 0.01). When filling out the self-reporting questionnaires, most of the patients (82%) preferred the TuTOR App helping them to remember to take the pills. Furthermore, 82% of patients used the app regularly (vs. 53% for the paper diary). Three patients suspended tofacitinib due to gastrointestinal intolerance. Both digital and paper devices can help maximize adherence to therapy; however, the TuTOR app was preferred by the patients for its simplicity and immediacy.

Tailoring Tofacitinib Oral Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis: The TuTORApp-A Usability Study.

OBJECTIVE: To create a mobile application able to help patients follow medical treatments properly. METHODS: We designed and developed a custom Android/iOS App to remind patients of the pharmaceutical drugs to be taken, of the visits and exams to attend, and to detect their compliance with their personal therapeutic plan. In this paper we describe the App development, UX/UI design, Gamification. TuTOR is an Android and iOS application designed to remind patients of the drugs to be taken, giving them all the information related to their therapeutic plans in a simple and non-invasive way. Thanks to a dedicated back-office, specially designed to meet specific medical information needs, the App can also help physicians detect their patients' compliance with their treatments and modify prescriptions in real time. The App also ensures a state-of-the-art approach to data security and privacy protection. The main feature of TuTOR is the smart therapy assistant, which features dedicated alarms to remind users of taking their prescription drugs. Thanks to the automatic synchronization with a local database, the alert system works even without connection to the Internet. Particular attention was paid during the App's design process: we looked to create an intuitive interface to ensure absolute ease of use, with state-of-the-art visual design aimed at maximizing user experience. Other relevant features include the App's ability to givevisual evidence of the most important drugs to be taken and its note-taking feature, which gives patients the possibility to note down indications on why a specific drug was skipped. The App also keeps track of upcoming medical exams, laboratory tests, and visits on a devoted calendar. It also helps patients by listing therapy contacts, such as physicians' phone numbers, and indicates all medical references by showing, for example, locations of relevant clinics and pharmacies on a map. Thanks to specific visual progress indicators and an innovative gamification approach, the App encourages users to faithfully follow therapy guidelines. With TuTOR, assessing the therapy's state of completion is quick and easy.Thanksto the privacy-by-design approach used, all data managed by the system is compliant with the European Privacy Regulation and it is not available to third parties. EXPECTED RESULTS: A mobile App for medication adherence might increase objectively and subjectively measured adherence.

Pilot prospective open, single-arm multicentre study on off-label use of tocilizumab in patients with severe COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: No agent has yet been proven to be effective for the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a pilot prospective open, single-arm multicentre study on off-label use of tocilizumab (TCZ) involving 63 hospitalised adult patients (56 males, age 62.6±12.5) with severe COVID-19. Clinical and laboratory parameters were prospectively collected at baseline, day 1, 2, 7 and 14. No moderate-to-severe adverse events attributable to TCZ were recorded. RESULTS: We observed a significant improvement in the levels of ferritin, C-reactive protein, D-dimer. The ratio of the partial pressure of oxygen (Pa02) to the fraction of inspired oxygen (Fi02) improved (mean±SD Pa02/Fi02 at admission: 152±53; at day 7: 283.73±115.9, at day 14: 302.2±126, p<0.05). The overall mortality was 11%; D-dimer level at baseline, but not IL-6 levels were predictors of mortality. TCZ administration within 6 days from admission in the hospital was associated with an increased likelihood of survival (HR 2.2 95%CI 1.3-6.7, p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalised adult patients with severe COVID-19, TCZ could be a safe option. An improvement in respiratory and laboratory parameters was observed. Future controlled trials in patients with severe illness are urgently needed to confirm the definite benefit with IL-6 target therapy.

Skin antisepsis with chlorhexidine versus iodine for the prevention of surgical site infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most frequent health care-associated infections. One of the practices to reduce their incidence is preoperative skin antisepsis. Two of the most commonly active components used are chlorhexidine gluconate and povidone iodine. Of 3 reviews conducted between 2010 and 2012 comparing antiseptics, 2 were in favor of chlorhexidine; however, the latest was unable to draw conclusions. PURPOSE: To verify whether recent evidence supports the hypothesis that chlorhexidine in preoperative antisepsis is more efficient than other antiseptics in reducing SSI rates. PROCEDURES: We conducted a systematic review from 2000-2014 in all languages. The primary end point was SSI incidence and secondary skin bacterial colonization. RESULTS: Nineteen studies were included. Meta-analysis were conducted for comparable studies for both outcomes. The results of the meta-analysis, including all of the studies in which chlorhexidine was compared with iodophor, were in favor of chlorhexidine for both SSI incidence (risk ratio [RR], 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52-0.92) and bacterial skin colonization (RR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.36-0.55). CONCLUSIONS: There is moderate-quality evidence supporting the use of chlorhexidine for preoperative skin antisepsis and high-quality evidence that the use of chlorhexidine is associated with fewer positive skin cultures. Further rigorous trials will be welcomed to attain stronger evidence as to the best antiseptic to be used before surgery.