Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Blood Res ; 58(2): 91-98, 2023 Jun 30.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37160381

RESUMEN

Background: With the emergence of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and inability of healthcare systems to control the disease, various therapeutic theories with controversial responses have been proposed. Plasmapheresis was administered as a medication. However, the knowledge of its efficacy and indications is inadequate. This study evaluated the use of plasmapheresis in critically ill patients with cancer. Methods: This randomized clinical trial was conducted on 86 patients with malignancies, including a control group (N=41) and an intervention group (N=45) with severe COVID-19 during 2020-21. Both groups were treated with routine medications for COVID-19 management according to national guidelines, and plasmapheresis was applied to the intervention group. C-reactive protein (CRP), D-dimer, ferritin, lactate dehydrogenase, hemoglobin, and white blood cell, polymorphonuclear, lymphocyte, and platelet levels were measured at admission and at the end of plasmapheresis. Other variables included neutrophil recovery, intensive care unit admission, intubation requirements, length of hospital stay, and hospitalization outcomes. Results: CRP(P<0.001), D-dimer (P<0.001), ferritin (P=0.039), and hemoglobin (P=0.006) levels were significantly different between the groups after the intervention. Neutrophil recovery was remarkably higher in the case than in the control group (P<0.001). However, plasmapheresis did not affect the length of hospital stay (P=0.076), which could have significantly increased survival rates (P<0.001). Conclusion: Based on the study findings, plasmapheresis led to a significant improvement in laboratory markers and survival rate in patients with severe COVID-19. These findings reinforce the value of plasmapheresis in cancer patients as a critical population suffering from neutropenia and insufficient immune responses.

2.
Adv Biomed Res ; 5: 10, 2016.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26962512

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The present study was aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of at least three cycles of Bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy regimens, FOLFIRI or FOLFOX to treat liver metastatic colorectal cancer and improved response rates in these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this non-randomized clinical trial, 38 patients were enrolled and followed for 12-weeks period of chemotherapy. Fifteen patients under treated with FOLOFX (Group I), 15 patients under treated with FOLOFIRI (Group II), 4 patients under treated with FOLOFX + Bevacizumab (Group III), and 34 patients under treated with FOLOFIRI + Bevacizumab (Group IV). Response to treatment was assessed in all patients as main endpoint. Patients in groups I and II, who did not response to treatment after 12 weeks of chemotherapy, were followed by groups III and IV regimens, respectively, for 12 weeks. RESULTS: Overall response rate was 35% (19 of 54), and complete response (CR), partial response (PR), progressive disease (PD), and stable disease (SD) rates in all patients were 18%, 17%, 35%, and 30%. PR, SD, and PD were different among groups, but no statistical significance was noted among groups (P-value >0.05). No patient achieved a CR in groups III and IV, although CR was observed in 4 patients (27%) and 6 patients (40%) in groups I and II, respectively. The rare of CR was statistically significant among studied groups (P-value = 0.013). CONCLUSION: Results showed that adding Bevacizumab to chemotherapy regimens, in patients who did not response to FOLFIRI or FOLFOX regimen, did not increase CR in these patients.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA