Evaluation of anakinra in the management of patients with COVID-19 infection: A randomized clinical trial.

Background: The global COVID-19 pandemic led to substantial clinical and economic outcomes with catastrophic consequences. While the majority of cases has mild to moderate disease, minority of patients progress into severe disease secondary to the stimulation of the immune response. The hyperinflammatory state contributes towards progression into multi-organ failure which necessitates suppressive therapy with variable outcomes. This study aims to explore the safety and efficacy of anakinra in COVID-19 patients with severe disease leading to cytokine release syndromes. Methods: In this open-label, multi-center, randomized clinical trial, patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection with evidence of respiratory distress and signs of cytokine release syndrome were randomized in 1:1 ratio to receive either standard of care (SOC) or anakinra (100 mg subcutaneously every 12 h for 3 days then 100 mg subcutaneously once daily for 4 days) in addition to SOC. The primary outcome was treatment success at day 14 as defined by the WHO clinical progression score of ≤3. Primary analysis was based upon intention-to-treat population, with value of p of <0.05. Results: Out 327 patients screened for eligibility, 80 patients were recruited for the study. The mean age was 49.9 years (SD = 11.7), with male predominance at 82.5% (n = 66). The primary outcome was not statistically different (87.5% (n = 35) in anakinra group vs. 92.5% (n = 37) in SOC group, p = 0.712; OR = 1.762 (95%CI: 0.39-7.93). The majority of reported adverse events were mild in severity and not related to the study treatment. Elevated aspartate aminotransferase was the only significant adverse event which was not associated with discontinuation of therapy. Conclusion: In patients with severe COVID-19 infection, the addition of anakinra to SOC treatment was safe but was not associated with significant improvement according to the WHO clinical progression scale. Further studies are warranted to explore patients' subgroups characteristics that might benefit from administered therapy. Clinical Trial Registration: Trial registration at ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT04643678.

Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics: A Systematic Review of Their Non-Systemic Adverse Effect Profile.

INTRODUCTION: Long acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics are commonly used in the treatment of schizophrenia to improve adherence and clinical outcomes. Concerns have been reported in relation to their non-systemic or injection site adverse effect profile. As such, this study aims to review and evaluate all evidence reporting injection site adverse effects with LAI antipsychotics. METHODS: An electronic search was systematically conducted through four databases (PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, Cochrane) in order to identify studies investigating injection-site reactions associated with LAI antipsychotics. Unpublished studies such as conference proceedings and clinical trial registries were also searched. The search was limited to literature published in English without year limits. RESULTS: Of a total of 189 citations that were identified from the electronic database search, 12 were selected for inclusion in this review. Various injection site reactions were reported in these studies, including pain, bleeding, and swelling. Overall, the studies reported a low incidence of these injection site reactions. Only a minority of the included articles compared injection site reactions between different LAI antipsychotics. CONCLUSION: Injection site pain was the most commonly reported injection site adverse effect across all articles reviewed. The low incidence of injection site adverse effects associated with LAI antipsychotics indicates that these formulations appear to be well tolerated by patients. More head-to-head trials comparing second generation LAI antipsychotics are needed.

Evaluation of patient safety culture in community pharmacies in Qatar.

INTRODUCTION: Patient safety culture is a key contributor to medication safety globally. However, the perspective of pharmacists and other personnel in community pharmacy regarding patient safety culture may vary from one country to another. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the perspectives of community pharmacy personnel in Qatar about patient safety culture in community pharmacy setting. METHODS: A cross-sectional web-based survey utilising the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Community Pharmacy Survey on Patient Safety Culture was conducted. Participants included community pharmacy personnel practicing in Qatar. Both descriptive and inferential statistics were applied for data analyses, with statistical significance set at ≤ 0.05. RESULTS: Two hundred and forty participants completed the survey. A large proportion of the respondents (52.5%) reported an "excellent" overall rating of patient safety in their respective community pharmacies. Patient counselling and teamwork composites of patient safety culture were associated with the highest positive responses (95% and 93.7%, respectively). The "staffing, work pressure and pace" composite demonstrated the lowest positive response (50.6%) among the 11 composites. Inferential analysis revealed that working in chain pharmacies was significantly associated with positive responses related to "teamwork" (P = .019). Furthermore, working for more than 40 hours per week had a significant positive influence on the overall perceptions of patient safety (P = .025). CONCLUSION: There was an overall positive perception towards patient safety culture among the surveyed community pharmacy personnel in Qatar. Superiority was observed with patient counselling and teamwork, while staffing, work pressure and pace were judged poorly, warranting further investigations and potential targeting for interventions.

Effect of SAMe-TT2R2 score and genetic polymorphism on the quality of anticoagulation control in Qatari patients treated with warfarin.

There is no strong evidence on pharmacogenetics role on the quality of INR control after the initiation phase and on the maintenance of stable INR on the long term as measured by the time in therapeutic range (TTR). The benefit of a score such as SAMe-TT2R2 is that it can preemptively guide clinicians on whether to start the patient on warfarin or direct oral anticoagulant. To determine the association between genetic variants in CYP2C9, VKORC1, and CYP4F2 and TTR. To validate SAMe-TT2R2 score predictive ability on the quality of anticoagulation in Qatari patients. This is an observational nested case-control study that was conducted on a cohort of Qatari patients treated with warfarin with previously identified genotype for the CYP2C9, VKORC1, and CYP2F4. The sample size of this cohort was 148 patients. Mean TTR was 62.7 ± 21%. TTR was not significantly different among carriers of the CYP2C9*2 &*3, VKORC1(-1639G>A) or CYP4F2*3 compared to their non-carriers alleles. None of the factors in the SAMe-TT2R2 score had a significant effect on the TTR except for the female gender where TTR was significantly lower in females (n = 89) compared to males (n = 59) (59.6 ± 21% vs. 67.2 ± 20%, p = 0.03). Furthermore, patients with SAMe-TT2R2 score of zero had significantly better TTR compared to those with higher scores (76.5 ± 17% vs. 61.8 ± 21%, p = 0.04). Logistic regression analysis showed that high SAMe-TT2R2 score was the only statistically significant predicting factor of poor INR control (odds ratio (OR) 5.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1-28.3, p = 0.034). Genetic variants have no contribution to the quality of INR control. SAMe-TT2R2 score was predictive for the poor quality of anticoagulation in a cohort of Qatari patients.