Epidemiology, patient journey and unmet needs related to hemophilia in Brazil: a scoping review with evidence map.

INTRODUCTION: Brazil is one of the countries with the largest population of people with hemophilia (PwH) worldwide. In this scoping review, we aim to investigate the Brazilian context for hemophilia regarding three predefined concepts: (i) clinical-epidemiological profile, (ii) burden of disease and (iii) patient journey and unmet needs. METHODS: Three questions in each concept guided the screening of references retrieved by systematic searches carried out in MEDLINE, LILACS and the Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations. Quantitative and qualitative studies conducted in Brazil from 2002 onwards were assessed for eligibility. MAIN RESULTS: Ninety-two studies were included. A total of 66 studies addressed the concept "Clinical-epidemiological profile", 31 investigated the concept of "Burden of disease" and 26 addressed the concept "Patient journey and unmet needs". Based on these studies, pain and arthropathy affect a substantial proportion of the PwH, with physical functioning, pain and school or work being the domains of quality of life with the greatest impact. About 43 % to 82.6 % of the PwH are unemployed. Rates of inhibitor development are highly variable across studies, especially in hemophilia A. Adherence to prophylactic treatment ranges from 25 % to 72 %. The annualized bleeding rate is estimated at 2.4 ± 4.1. The barriers to treatment identified include distance to reference centers, lack of coordination of specialized and emergency care and restricted access to rehabilitation. CONCLUSIONS: Hemophilia poses a considerable burden on the PwH. Despite the available modalities of treatment, there are remaining unmet needs that should be addressed by researchers and policy makers in the future.

A multimethods randomized trial found that plain language versions improved adults understanding of health recommendations.

OBJECTIVES: To make informed decisions, the general population should have access to accessible and understandable health recommendations. To compare understanding, accessibility, usability, satisfaction, intention to implement, and preference of adults provided with a digital "Plain Language Recommendation" (PLR) format vs. the original "Standard Language Version" (SLV). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: An allocation-concealed, blinded, controlled superiority trial and a qualitative study to understand participant preferences. An international on-line survey. 488 adults with some English proficiency. 67.8% of participants identified as female, 62.3% were from the Americas, 70.1% identified as white, 32.2% had a bachelor's degree as their highest completed education, and 42% said they were very comfortable reading health information. In collaboration with patient partners, advisors, and the Cochrane Consumer Network, we developed a plain language format of guideline recommendations (PLRs) to compare their effectiveness vs. the original standard language versions (SLVs) as published in the source guideline. We selected two recommendations about COVID-19 vaccine, similar in their content, to compare our versions, one from the World Health Organization (WHO) and one from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The primary outcome was understanding, measured as the proportion of correct responses to seven comprehension questions. Secondary outcomes were accessibility, usability, satisfaction, preference, and intended behavior, measured on a 1-7 scale. RESULTS: Participants randomized to the PLR group had a higher proportion of correct responses to the understanding questions for the WHO recommendation (mean difference [MD] of 19.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 14.7-24.9%; P < 0.001) but this difference was smaller and not statistically significant for the CDC recommendation (MD of 3.9%, 95% CI -0.7% to 8.3%; P = 0.096). However, regardless of the recommendation, participants found the PLRs more accessible, (MD of 1.2 on the seven-point scale, 95% CI 0.9-1.4%; P < 0.001) and more satisfying (MD of 1.2, 95% CI 0.9-1.4%; P < 0.001). They were also more likely to follow the recommendation if they had not already followed it (MD of 1.2, 95% CI 0.7-1.8%; P < 0.001) and share it with other people they know (MD of 1.9, 95% CI 0.5-1.2%; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the preference between the two formats (MD of -0.3, 95% CI -0.5% to 0.03%; P = 0.078). The qualitative interviews supported and contextualized these findings. CONCLUSION: Health information provided in a PLR format improved understanding, accessibility, usability, and satisfaction and thereby has the potential to shape public decision-making behavior.

Evidence-Based Checklist to Delay Cardiac Arrest in Brain-Dead Potential Organ Donors: The DONORS Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The effectiveness of goal-directed care to reduce loss of brain-dead potential donors to cardiac arrest is unclear. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of an evidence-based, goal-directed checklist in the clinical management of brain-dead potential donors in the intensive care unit (ICU). Design, Setting, and Participants: The Donation Network to Optimize Organ Recovery Study (DONORS) was an open-label, parallel-group cluster randomized clinical trial in Brazil. Enrollment and follow-up were conducted from June 20, 2017, to November 30, 2019. Hospital ICUs that reported 10 or more brain deaths in the previous 2 years were included. Consecutive brain-dead potential donors in the ICU aged 14 to 90 years with a condition consistent with brain death after the first clinical examination were enrolled. Participants were randomized to either the intervention group or the control group. The intention-to-treat data analysis was conducted from June 15 to August 30, 2020. Interventions: Hospital staff in the intervention group were instructed to administer to brain-dead potential donors in the intervention group an evidence-based checklist with 13 clinical goals and 14 corresponding actions to guide care, every 6 hours, from study enrollment to organ retrieval. The control group provided or received usual care. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was loss of brain-dead potential donors to cardiac arrest at the individual level. A prespecified sensitivity analysis assessed the effect of adherence to the checklist in the intervention group. Results: Among the 1771 brain-dead potential donors screened in 63 hospitals, 1535 were included. These patients included 673 males (59.2%) and had a median (IQR) age of 51 (36.3-62.0) years. The main cause of brain injury was stroke (877 [57.1%]), followed by trauma (485 [31.6%]). Of the 63 hospitals, 31 (49.2%) were assigned to the intervention group (743 [48.4%] brain-dead potential donors) and 32 (50.8%) to the control group (792 [51.6%] brain-dead potential donors). Seventy potential donors (9.4%) at intervention hospitals and 117 (14.8%) at control hospitals met the primary outcome (risk ratio [RR], 0.70; 95% CI, 0.46-1.08; P = .11). The primary outcome rate was lower in those with adherence higher than 79.0% than in the control group (5.3% vs 14.8%; RR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.22-0.78; P = .006). Conclusions and Relevance: This cluster randomized clinical trial was inconclusive in determining whether the overall use of an evidence-based, goal-directed checklist reduced brain-dead potential donor loss to cardiac arrest. The findings suggest that use of such a checklist has limited effectiveness without adherence to the actions recommended in this checklist. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03179020.

The II Brazilian Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 Joint Guidelines of the Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia and Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia.

OBJECTIVE: To update the recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. METHODS: Experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. RESULTS: Twenty-one recommendations were generated, including strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen and conditional recommendations for the use of tocilizumab and baricitinib for patients on supplemental oxygen or on noninvasive ventilation and anticoagulants to prevent thromboembolism. Due to suspension of use authorization, it was not possible to make recommendations regarding the use of casirivimab + imdevimab. Strong recommendations against the use of azithromycin in patients without suspected bacterial infection, hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, and lopinavir + ritonavir and conditional recommendations against the use of ivermectin and remdesivir were made. CONCLUSION: New recommendations for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were generated, such as those for tocilizumab and baricitinib. Corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are still recommended, the latter with conditional recommendation. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and to promote resource economy.

Long-term Health-Related Quality of Life and Outcomes after Hospitalization for COVID-19 in Brazil: Post-COVID Brazil 1 Study Protocol. / Qualidade de Vida em Longo Prazo e Desfechos após Internação por COVID-19 no Brasil: Protocolo do Estudo Pós-COVID Brasil 1.

BACKGROUND: The long-term impact of hospitalization for COVID-19 on patients' physical, mental, and cognitive health still needs further assessment. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to evaluate factors associated with quality of life and cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular outcomes 12 months after hospitalization for COVID-19. METHODS: This prospective multicenter study intends to enroll 611 patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 (NCT05165979). Centralized telephone interviews are scheduled to occur at three, six, nine, and 12 months after hospital discharge. The primary endpoint is defined as the health-related quality-of-life utility score assessed by the EuroQol-5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire at 12 months. Secondary endpoints are defined as the EQ-5D-3L at three, six and nine months, return to work or education, persistent symptoms, new disabilities in instrumental activities of daily living, cognitive impairment, anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress symptoms, major cardiovascular events, rehospitalization, as well as all-cause mortality at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. A p-value <0.05 will be assumed as statistically significant for all analyses. RESULTS: The primary endpoint will be presented as the frequency of the EQ-5D-3L score 12 months after COVID-19 hospitalization. A sub-analysis to identify possible associations of independent variables with study outcomes will be presented. CONCLUSIONS: This study will determine the impact of COVID-19 on the quality of life and cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular outcomes of hospitalized patients 12 months after discharge providing insights to the public health system in Brazil.

FUNDAMENTO: O impacto em longo prazo da hospitalização por COVID-19 sobre a saúde física, mental e cognitiva dos pacientes requer mais investigação. OBJETIVOS: Este artigo visa avaliar os fatores associados com a qualidade de vida e desfechos cardiovasculares e não cardiovasculares 12 meses após a internação hospitalar por COVID-19. MÉTODOS: Este estudo multicêntrico prospectivo pretende incluir 611 pacientes internados por COVID-19 (NCT05165979). Entrevistas telefônicas centralizadas estão programadas para ocorrer em três, seis, nove e 12 meses após a alta hospitalar. O desfecho primário é definido como o escore de utilidade de qualidade de vida relacionada à saúde avaliada pelo questionário EuroQol-5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L) aos 12 meses. Desfechos secundários são definidos como o EQ-5D-3L aos três, seis e nove meses, retorno ao trabalho ou à escola, sintomas persistentes, novas incapacidades em atividades instrumentais diárias, déficit cognitivo, ansiedade, depressão, e sintomas de transtorno do estresse pós-traumático, eventos cardiovasculares maiores, reinternação, e mortalidade por todas as causas aos três, seis, nove e 12 meses após a infecção pelo SARS-CoV-2. Um valor de p<0,05 será considerado estatisticamente significativo para as análises. RESULTADOS: O desfecho primário será apresentado como frequência do escore EQ-5D-3L 12 meses após a internação por COVID-19. Uma subanálise para identificar possíveis associações das variáveis independentes com desfechos do estudo será apresentada. CONCLUSÃO: Este estudo determinará o impacto da COVID-19 sobre a qualidade de vida e de desfechos cardiovasculares e não cardiovasculares de pacientes internados 12 meses após a alta, e fornecerá novas informações ao sistema público de saúde no Brasil.

Health-Related Quality of Life and Long-Term Outcomes after Mildly Symptomatic COVID-19: The Post-COVID Brazil Study 2 Protocol. / Qualidade de Vida Relacionada à Saúde e Desfechos em Longo Prazo após COVID-19 Sintomática Leve: Protocolo do Estudo Pós-COVID Brasil 2.

BACKGROUND: The long-term effects of mild COVID-19 on physical, cognitive, and mental health are not yet well understood. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper is to describe the protocol for the ongoing "Post-COVID Brazil" study 2, which aims to evaluate the factors associated with health-related quality of life and long-term cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular outcomes one year after a mild episode of symptomatic COVID-19. METHODS: The "Post-COVID Brazil" study 2 is a prospective multicenter study that plans to enroll 1047 patients (NCT05197647). Centralized, structured telephone interviews are conducted at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after COVID-19 diagnosis. The primary outcome is the health-related quality-of-life utility score, assessed using the EuroQol-5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire at 12 months. Secondary endpoints include the EQ-5D-3L at 3, 6, and 9 months, as well as all-cause mortality, major cardiovascular events, hospitalization, return to work or education, persistent symptoms, new disabilities in instrumental activities of daily living, cognitive impairment, anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress symptoms at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. A p-value < 0.05 will be considered statistically significant for all analyses. RESULTS: The primary endpoint will be presented as the overall frequency of the EQ-5D-3L domains 12 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main analysis will explore the association of independent variables with the study outcomes. CONCLUSION: The "Post-COVID Brazil" study 2 aims to clarify the impact of long COVID on the quality of life and cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular outcomes of Brazilian patients who have had mild COVID-19.

FUNDAMENTO: Os efeitos em longo prazo da COVID-19 leve sobre a saúde física, mental e cognitiva ainda não são bem conhecidos. OBJETIVO: Este artigo visa descrever o protocolo para o estudo em andamento Pós-COVID Brasil 2, o qual tem como objetivo avaliar os fatores associados à qualidade de vida associada à saúde e desfechos cardiovasculares e não cardiovasculares de longo prazo um ano após um episódio de COVID-19 sintomática leve. MÉTODOS: O estudo "Pós-COVID Brasil 2" é um estudo multicêntrico prospectivo que pretende incluir 1047 pacientes (NCT05197647). Entrevistas estruturas, centralizadas são conduzidas em um mês, e aos três, seis, nove e 12 meses após o diagnóstico de COVID-19. O desfecho primário é o escore de utilidade da qualidade de vida relacionada à saúde, avaliado usando o questionário EuroQol-5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L) aos 12 meses. Desfechos secundários incluem o EQ-5D-3L aos três, seis e nove meses, mortalidade por todas as causas, eventos cardiovasculares maiores, hospitalização, retorno ao trabalho ou à escola, sintomas persistentes, novas incapacidades em atividades instrumentais diárias, déficit cognitivo, ansiedade, depressão, e sintomas de transtorno do estresse pós-traumático as três, seis, nove e doze meses após a infecção pelo SARS-CoV-2. Um valor de p<0,05 será considerado estatisticamente significativo para as análises. RESULTADOS: O desfecho primário será apresentado como frequência dos domínios do EQ-5D-3L doze meses após a infecção por SARS-CoV-2. A análise principal explorará a associação das variáveis independentes com os desfechos do estudo. CONCLUSÃO: O estudo "Pós-COVID Brasil 2" tem como objetivo elucidar o impacto da COVID longa sobre a qualidade de vida e desfechos cardiovasculares e não cardiovasculares de brasileiros pacientes que apresentaram COVID-19 leve.

The II Brazilian Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 Joint Guidelines of the Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia and Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia / II Diretrizes Brasileiras para o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 Diretriz conjunta da Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia e Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia

ABSTRACT Objective: To update the recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. Methods: Experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. Results: Twenty-one recommendations were generated, including strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen and conditional recommendations for the use of tocilizumab and baricitinib for patients on supplemental oxygen or on noninvasive ventilation and anticoagulants to prevent thromboembolism. Due to suspension of use authorization, it was not possible to make recommendations regarding the use of casirivimab + imdevimab. Strong recommendations against the use of azithromycin in patients without suspected bacterial infection, hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, and lopinavir + ritonavir and conditional recommendations against the use of ivermectin and remdesivir were made. Conclusion: New recommendations for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were generated, such as those for tocilizumab and baricitinib. Corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are still recommended, the latter with conditional recommendation. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and to promote resource economy.

RESUMO Objetivo: Atualizar as recomendações para embasar as decisões para o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 no Brasil. Métodos: A elaboração desta diretriz foi feita por especialistas, incluindo representantes do Ministério da Saúde e metodologistas. O método utilizado para o desenvolvimento rápido de diretrizes baseou-se na adoção e/ou adaptação de diretrizes internacionais existentes (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) e contou com o apoio da plataforma e-COVID-19 RecMap. A qualidade das evidências e a elaboração das recomendações seguiram o método GRADE. Resultados: Chegaram-se a 21 recomendações, incluindo recomendações fortes quanto ao uso de corticosteroides em pacientes em uso de oxigênio suplementar e recomendações condicionais para o uso de tocilizumabe e baricitinibe, em pacientes com oxigênio suplementar ou ventilação não invasiva, e de anticoagulantes, para prevenção de tromboembolismo. Devido à suspensão da autorização de uso, não foi possível fazer recomendações para o tratamento com casirivimabe + imdevimabe. Foram feitas recomendações fortes contra o uso de azitromicina em pacientes sem suspeita de infecção bacteriana, hidroxicloroquina, plasma convalescente, colchicina e lopinavir + ritonavir, além de recomendações condicionais contra o uso de ivermectina e rendesivir. Conclusão: Foram criadas novas recomendações para o tratamento de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19, como as recomendações de tocilizumabe e baricitinibe. Ainda são recomendados corticosteroides e profilaxia contra tromboembolismo, esta em caráter condicional. Vários medicamentos foram considerados ineficazes e não devem ser usados, no intuito de proporcionar o melhor tratamento segundo os princípios da medicina baseada em evidências e promover a economia de recursos.

Pan-American Guidelines for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19: a joint evidence-based guideline of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases (SBI) and the Pan-American Association of Infectious Diseases (API).

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, therapeutic options for treating COVID-19 have been investigated at different stages of clinical manifestations. Considering the particular impact of COVID-19 in the Americas, this document aims to present recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of COVID-19 specific to this population. METHODS: Fifteen experts, members of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases (SBI) and the Pan-American Association of Infectious Diseases (API) make up the panel responsible for developing this guideline. Questions were formulated regarding prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19 in outpatient and inpatient settings. The outcomes considered in decision-making were mortality, hospitalisation, need for mechanical ventilation, symptomatic COVID-19 episodes, and adverse events. In addition, a systematic review of randomised controlled trials was conducted. The quality of evidence assessment and guideline development process followed the GRADE system. RESULTS: Nine technologies were evaluated, and ten recommendations were made, including the use of tixagevimab + cilgavimab in the prophylaxis of COVID-19, tixagevimab + cilgavimab, molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir + ritonavir, and remdesivir in the treatment of outpatients, and remdesivir, baricitinib, and tocilizumab in the treatment of hospitalised patients with severe COVID-19. The use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine and ivermectin was discouraged. CONCLUSION: This guideline provides recommendations for treating patients in the Americas following the principles of evidence-based medicine. The recommendations present a set of drugs that have proven effective in the prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19, emphasising the strong recommendation for the use of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in outpatients as the lack of benefit from the use of hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.

Equity issues rarely addressed in the development of COVID-19 formal recommendations and good practice statements: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To identify COVID-19 actionable statements (e.g., recommendations) focused on specific disadvantaged populations in the living map of COVID-19 recommendations (eCOVIDRecMap) and describe how health equity was assessed in the development of the formal recommendations. METHODS: We employed the place of residence, race or ethnicity or culture, occupation, gender or sex, religion, education, socio-economic status, and social capital-Plus framework to identify statements focused on specific disadvantaged populations. We assessed health equity considerations in the evidence to decision frameworks (EtD) of formal recommendations for certainty of evidence and impact on health equity criteria according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations criteria. RESULTS: We identified 16% (124/758) formal recommendations and 24% (186/819) good practice statements (GPS) that were focused on specific disadvantaged populations. Formal recommendations (40%, 50/124) and GPS (25%, 47/186) most frequently focused on children. Seventy-six percent (94/124) of the recommendations were accompanied with EtDs. Over half (55%, 52/94) of those considered indirectness of the evidence for disadvantaged populations. Considerations in impact on health equity criterion most frequently involved implementation of the recommendation for disadvantaged populations (17%, 16/94). CONCLUSION: Equity issues were rarely explicitly considered in the development COVID-19 formal recommendations focused on specific disadvantaged populations. Guidance is needed to support the consideration of health equity in guideline development during health emergencies.

BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 against symptomatic Omicron infection following a mass vaccination campaign in southern Brazil: A prospective test-negative design study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence regarding effectiveness of BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine against Omicron in Latin America is limited. We estimated BNT162b2 effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 in Brazil when Omicron was predominant. METHODS: This prospective test-negative, case-control study was conducted in Toledo, Brazil, following a mass COVID-19 vaccination with BNT162b2. Patients were included if they were aged ≥12 years, sought care for acute respiratory symptoms in the public health system between November 3, 2021 and June 20, 2022, and were tested for SARS-CoV-2 using RT-PCR. In the primary analysis, we determined the effectiveness of two doses of BNT162b2 against symptomatic COVID-19. RESULTS: A total of 4,574 were enrolled; of these, 1,758 patients (586 cases and 1,172 controls) were included in the primary analysis. Mean age was 27.7 years, 53.8 % were women, and 90.1 % had a Charlson comorbidity index of zero. Omicron accounted for >97 % of all identified SARS-CoV-2 variants, with BA.1 and BA.2 accounting for 84.3 % and 12.6 %, respectively. Overall adjusted estimate of two-dose vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 was 46.7 % (95 %CI, 19.9 %-64.6 %) after a median time between the second dose and the beginning of COVID-19 symptoms of 94 days (IQR, 60-139 days). Effectiveness waned from 77.7 % at 7-29 days after receipt of a second dose to <30 % (non-significant) after ≥120 days. CONCLUSION: In a relatively young and healthy Brazilian population, two doses of BNT162b2 provided protection against symptomatic Omicron infection. However, this protection waned significantly over time, underscoring the need for boosting with variant-adapted vaccines in this population prior to waves of disease activity. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05052307 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05052307).

Estimated mortality rates of individuals with sickle cell disease in Brazil: real-world evidence.

Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a group of hereditary chronic diseases with a substantial impact on quality of life and morbimortality. In Brazil, it is 1 of the most common hereditary diseases; however, there are sparse epidemiological data for the country. Using data from death certificates, we aimed to estimate the median age at death, years of life lost because of SCD, and the median survival. From 2015 to 2019, we identified 3320 records of deaths of individuals with SCD, from a total of 6 553 132 death records. Among individuals with SCD, the median age at death was 37 years less than that of the general population (SCD: aged 32.0 years at death, interquartile range [IQR], 19.0-46.0; general population: aged 69.0 years at death; IQR, 53.0-81.0). Results were consistent when stratified by sex or race. Over the 5 years evaluated, crude death rates varied from 0.30 to 0.34 per 100 000 inhabitants (mean 0.32 per 100 000 inhabitants). We estimated a prevalence of 60 017 individuals living with SCD (29.02 cases per 100 000) and an average incidence of 1362 cases yearly. The median estimated survival was 40 years for individuals with SCD and 80 years for the general population. SCD was associated with an increased risk of mortality in most age ranges. Among individuals with SCD aged between 1 and 9 years and between 10 and 39 years, the risk of death was 32 and 13 times higher, respectively. The most common causes of death were sepsis and respiratory failure. These results highlight the burden of SCD in Brazil and the necessity of improved care for this population.

Innovative mechanisms of pre-marketing authorization access for rare diseases in Brazil: a case study of pabinafusp-alfa for mucopolysaccharidosis type II / Mecanismos inovadores de acesso pré-comercialização a tecnologias para doenças raras no Brasil: um estudo de caso de alfapabinafuspe para mucopolissacaridose tipo II

Patients with rare diseases frequently face unmet medical needs due to the high costs, lengthy development times, and slow approval processes for new treatments. This case study discusses innovative access alternatives for rare diseases in Brazil, focusing on early access to pabinafusp-alfa for mucopolysaccharidosis type II (MPS-II), a rare genetic lysosomal storage disease characterized by a deficiency of the enzyme iduronate-2-sulfatase. From September 2018 to March 2023, 20 Brazilian MPS-II patients received pabinafusp-alfa through a clinical research protocol. This enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) crosses the blood-brain barrier to address central nervous system manifestations unmet by existing treatments. Patients' participation in the clinical study resulted in an estimated BRL 65 million in cost savings for the public healthcare system compared to conventional ERT with idursulfase-alfa and potentially better clinical outcomes. The case study underscores the importance of innovative mechanisms in addressing patients' medical needs. Early access alternatives include: a) clinical study access, with execution/development aligned with healthcare managers and linked to future access strategies; b) regulatory-level risk-sharing, considering effectiveness uncertainties and the possibility of market withdrawal and/or reimbursement in case of negative results; and c) drug pre-delivery, with payment contingent on positive phase III clinical study outcomes. Although public-private partnerships in clinical research are underused, they could benefit all stakeholders by accelerating drug development, facilitating early patient access to innovative medicines, and generating healthcare system savings, particularly for rare diseases.

Pacientes com doenças raras frequentemente enfrentam necessidades médicas não atendidas devido aos altos custos, longos tempos de desenvolvimento e processos de aprovação lentos para novos tratamentos. Este estudo de caso discute alternativas inovadoras de acesso para doenças raras no Brasil, com foco no acesso precoce ao alfapabinafuspe para mucopolissacaridose tipo II (MPS-II), uma doença lisossômica de armazenamento genético rara, caracterizada por uma deficiência da enzima iduronato-2-sulfatase. De setembro de 2018 a março de 2023, 20 pacientes brasileiros com MPS-II receberam alfapabinafuspe por meio de pesquisa clínica. Essa terapia de reposição enzimática (TRE) atravessa a barreira hematoencefálica para tratar manifestações do sistema nervoso central não atendidas pelos tratamentos existentes. A participação dos pacientes no estudo clínico resultou em uma economia estimada de 65 milhões de reais para o sistema público de saúde, em comparação com a TRE convencional com idursulfase alfa, além de potencialmente melhores resultados clínicos. O estudo de caso destaca a importância de mecanismos inovadores no atendimento das necessidades médicas dos pacientes. As alternativas de acesso precoce incluem: a) acesso por meio de estudos clínicos, com execução/desenvolvimento alinhada aos gestores de saúde e vinculada a estratégias futuras de acesso; b) compartilhamento de risco em nível regulatório, considerando as incertezas de eficácia e a possibilidade de retirada do mercado e reembolso em caso de resultados negativos; e c) pré-entrega do medicamento, com pagamento condicionado aos resultados positivos do estudo clínico de fase III. Embora as parcerias público-privadas em pesquisa clínica sejam subutilizadas, elas poderiam beneficiar todas as partes interessadas ao acelerar o desenvolvimento de medicamentos, facilitar o acesso precoce dos pacientes a medicamentos inovadores e gerar economias para o sistema de saúde, especialmente para doenças raras.

Association between acute disease severity and one-year quality of life among post-hospitalisation COVID-19 patients: Coalition VII prospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: To assess the association between acute disease severity and 1-year quality of life in patients discharged after hospitalisation due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study nested in 5 randomised clinical trials between March 2020 and March 2022 at 84 sites in Brazil. Adult post-hospitalisation COVID-19 patients were followed for 1 year. The primary outcome was the utility score of EuroQol five-dimension three-level (EQ-5D-3L). Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, major cardiovascular events, and new disabilities in instrumental activities of daily living. Adjusted generalised estimating equations were used to assess the association between outcomes and acute disease severity according to the highest level on a modified ordinal scale during hospital stay (2: no oxygen therapy; 3: oxygen by mask or nasal prongs; 4: high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy or non-invasive ventilation; 5: mechanical ventilation). RESULTS: 1508 COVID-19 survivors were enrolled. Primary outcome data were available for 1156 participants. At 1 year, compared with severity score 2, severity score 5 was associated with lower EQ-5D-3L utility scores (0.7 vs 0.84; adjusted difference, - 0.1 [95% CI - 0.15 to - 0.06]); and worse results for all-cause mortality (7.9% vs 1.2%; adjusted difference, 7.1% [95% CI 2.5%-11.8%]), major cardiovascular events (5.6% vs 2.3%; adjusted difference, 2.6% [95% CI 0.6%-4.6%]), and new disabilities (40.4% vs 23.5%; adjusted difference, 15.5% [95% CI 8.5%-22.5]). Severity scores 3 and 4 did not differ consistently from score 2. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 patients who needed mechanical ventilation during hospitalisation have lower 1-year quality of life than COVID-19 patients who did not need mechanical ventilation during hospitalisation.

Knowledge mobilization activities to support decision-making by youth, parents, and adults using a systematic and living map of evidence and recommendations on COVID-19: protocol for three randomized controlled trials and qualitative user-experience studies.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic underlined that guidelines and recommendations must be made more accessible and more understandable to the general public to improve health outcomes. The objective of this study is to evaluate, quantify, and compare the public's understanding, usability, satisfaction, intention to implement, and preference for different ways of presenting COVID-19 health recommendations derived from the COVID-19 Living Map of Recommendations and Gateway to Contextualization (RecMap). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a protocol for a multi-method study. Through an online survey, we will conduct pragmatic allocation-concealed, blinded superiority randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in three populations to test alternative formats of presenting health recommendations: adults, parents, and youth, with at least 240 participants in each population. Prior to initiating the RCT, our interventions will have been refined with relevant stakeholder input. The intervention arm will receive a plain language recommendation (PLR) format while the control arm will receive the corresponding original recommendation format as originally published by the guideline organizations (standard language version). Our primary outcome is understanding, and our secondary outcomes are accessibility and usability, satisfaction, intended behavior, and preference for the recommendation formats. Each population's results will be analyzed separately. However, we are planning a meta-analysis of the results across populations. At the end of each survey, participants will be invited to participate in an optional one-on-one, virtual semi-structured interview to explore their user experience. All interviews will be transcribed and analyzed using the principles of thematic analysis and a hybrid inductive and deductive approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Through Clinical Trials Ontario, the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board has reviewed and approved this protocol (Project ID: 3856). The University of Alberta has approved the parent portion of the trial (Project ID:00114894). Findings from this study will be disseminated through open-access publications in peer-reviewed journals and using social media. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05358990 . Registered on May 3, 2022.

Qualidade de Vida Relacionada à Saúde e Desfechos em Longo Prazo após COVID-19 Sintomática Leve: Protocolo do Estudo Pós-COVID Brasil 2 / Health-Related Quality of Life and Long-Term Outcomes after Mildly Symptomatic COVID-19: The Post-COVID Brazil Study 2 Protocol

Resumo Fundamento Os efeitos em longo prazo da COVID-19 leve sobre a saúde física, mental e cognitiva ainda não são bem conhecidos. Objetivo Este artigo visa descrever o protocolo para o estudo em andamento Pós-COVID Brasil 2, o qual tem como objetivo avaliar os fatores associados à qualidade de vida associada à saúde e desfechos cardiovasculares e não cardiovasculares de longo prazo um ano após um episódio de COVID-19 sintomática leve. Métodos O estudo "Pós-COVID Brasil 2" é um estudo multicêntrico prospectivo que pretende incluir 1047 pacientes (NCT05197647). Entrevistas estruturas, centralizadas são conduzidas em um mês, e aos três, seis, nove e 12 meses após o diagnóstico de COVID-19. O desfecho primário é o escore de utilidade da qualidade de vida relacionada à saúde, avaliado usando o questionário EuroQol-5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L) aos 12 meses. Desfechos secundários incluem o EQ-5D-3L aos três, seis e nove meses, mortalidade por todas as causas, eventos cardiovasculares maiores, hospitalização, retorno ao trabalho ou à escola, sintomas persistentes, novas incapacidades em atividades instrumentais diárias, déficit cognitivo, ansiedade, depressão, e sintomas de transtorno do estresse pós-traumático as três, seis, nove e doze meses após a infecção pelo SARS-CoV-2. Um valor de p<0,05 será considerado estatisticamente significativo para as análises. Resultados O desfecho primário será apresentado como frequência dos domínios do EQ-5D-3L doze meses após a infecção por SARS-CoV-2. A análise principal explorará a associação das variáveis independentes com os desfechos do estudo. Conclusão O estudo "Pós-COVID Brasil 2" tem como objetivo elucidar o impacto da COVID longa sobre a qualidade de vida e desfechos cardiovasculares e não cardiovasculares de brasileiros pacientes que apresentaram COVID-19 leve.

Abstract Background The long-term effects of mild COVID-19 on physical, cognitive, and mental health are not yet well understood. Objective The purpose of this paper is to describe the protocol for the ongoing "Post-COVID Brazil" study 2, which aims to evaluate the factors associated with health-related quality of life and long-term cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular outcomes one year after a mild episode of symptomatic COVID-19. Methods The "Post-COVID Brazil" study 2 is a prospective multicenter study that plans to enroll 1047 patients (NCT05197647). Centralized, structured telephone interviews are conducted at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after COVID-19 diagnosis. The primary outcome is the health-related quality-of-life utility score, assessed using the EuroQol-5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire at 12 months. Secondary endpoints include the EQ-5D-3L at 3, 6, and 9 months, as well as all-cause mortality, major cardiovascular events, hospitalization, return to work or education, persistent symptoms, new disabilities in instrumental activities of daily living, cognitive impairment, anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress symptoms at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. A p-value < 0.05 will be considered statistically significant for all analyses. Results The primary endpoint will be presented as the overall frequency of the EQ-5D-3L domains 12 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main analysis will explore the association of independent variables with the study outcomes. Conclusion The "Post-COVID Brazil" study 2 aims to clarify the impact of long COVID on the quality of life and cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular outcomes of Brazilian patients who have had mild COVID-19.

Qualidade de Vida em Longo Prazo e Desfechos após Internação por COVID-19 no Brasil: Protocolo do Estudo Pós-COVID Brasil 1 / Long-term Health-Related Quality of Life and Outcomes after Hospitalization for COVID-19 in Brazil: Post-COVID Brazil 1 Study Protocol

Resumo Fundamento O impacto em longo prazo da hospitalização por COVID-19 sobre a saúde física, mental e cognitiva dos pacientes requer mais investigação. Objetivos Este artigo visa avaliar os fatores associados com a qualidade de vida e desfechos cardiovasculares e não cardiovasculares 12 meses após a internação hospitalar por COVID-19. Métodos Este estudo multicêntrico prospectivo pretende incluir 611 pacientes internados por COVID-19 (NCT05165979). Entrevistas telefônicas centralizadas estão programadas para ocorrer em três, seis, nove e 12 meses após a alta hospitalar. O desfecho primário é definido como o escore de utilidade de qualidade de vida relacionada à saúde avaliada pelo questionário EuroQol-5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L) aos 12 meses. Desfechos secundários são definidos como o EQ-5D-3L aos três, seis e nove meses, retorno ao trabalho ou à escola, sintomas persistentes, novas incapacidades em atividades instrumentais diárias, déficit cognitivo, ansiedade, depressão, e sintomas de transtorno do estresse pós-traumático, eventos cardiovasculares maiores, reinternação, e mortalidade por todas as causas aos três, seis, nove e 12 meses após a infecção pelo SARS-CoV-2. Um valor de p<0,05 será considerado estatisticamente significativo para as análises. Resultados O desfecho primário será apresentado como frequência do escore EQ-5D-3L 12 meses após a internação por COVID-19. Uma subanálise para identificar possíveis associações das variáveis independentes com desfechos do estudo será apresentada. Conclusão Este estudo determinará o impacto da COVID-19 sobre a qualidade de vida e de desfechos cardiovasculares e não cardiovasculares de pacientes internados 12 meses após a alta, e fornecerá novas informações ao sistema público de saúde no Brasil.

Abstract Background The long-term impact of hospitalization for COVID-19 on patients' physical, mental, and cognitive health still needs further assessment. Objectives This study aims to evaluate factors associated with quality of life and cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular outcomes 12 months after hospitalization for COVID-19. Methods This prospective multicenter study intends to enroll 611 patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 (NCT05165979). Centralized telephone interviews are scheduled to occur at three, six, nine, and 12 months after hospital discharge. The primary endpoint is defined as the health-related quality-of-life utility score assessed by the EuroQol-5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire at 12 months. Secondary endpoints are defined as the EQ-5D-3L at three, six and nine months, return to work or education, persistent symptoms, new disabilities in instrumental activities of daily living, cognitive impairment, anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress symptoms, major cardiovascular events, rehospitalization, as well as all-cause mortality at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. A p-value <0.05 will be assumed as statistically significant for all analyses. Results The primary endpoint will be presented as the frequency of the EQ-5D-3L score 12 months after COVID-19 hospitalization. A sub-analysis to identify possible associations of independent variables with study outcomes will be presented. Conclusions This study will determine the impact of COVID-19 on the quality of life and cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular outcomes of hospitalized patients 12 months after discharge providing insights to the public health system in Brazil.

Pan-American Guidelines for the Treatment of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19: a joint evidence-based guideline of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases (SBI) and the Pan-American Association of Infectious Diseases (API) [Pré-print]

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, therapeutic options for treating COVID-19 have been investigated at different stages of clinical manifestations. Considering the particular impact of COVID-19 in the Americas, this document aims to present recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of COVID-19 specific to this population. Fifteen experts, members of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases (SBI) and the Pan-American Association of Infectious Diseases (API) make up the panel responsible for developing this guideline. Questions were formulated regarding prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19 in outpatient and inpatient settings. The outcomes considered in decision-making were mortality, hospitalisation, need for mechanical ventilation, symptomatic COVID-19 episodes, and adverse events. In addition, a systematic review of randomised controlled trials was conducted. The quality of evidence assessment and guideline development process followed the GRADE system. Nine technologies were evaluated, and ten recommendations were made, including the use of tixagevimab + cilgavimab in the prophylaxis of COVID-19, tixagevimab + cilgavimab, molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir + ritonavir, and remdesivir in the treatment of outpatients, and remdesivir, baricitinib, and tocilizumab in the treatment of hospitalised patients with severe COVID-19. The use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine and ivermectin was discouraged. This guideline provides recommendations for treating patients in the Americas following the principles of evidence-based medicine. The recommendations present a set of drugs that have proven effective in the prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19, emphasising the strong recommendation for the use of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in outpatients as the lack of benefit from the use of hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin

Cost comparison of dupilumab and omalizumab for the treatment of severe allergic asthma patients from the Brazilian private healthcare system perspective / Comparação dos custos de dupilumabe e omalizumabe para o tratamento de pacientes com asma alérgica grave na perspectiva do sistema de saúde privado brasileiro

Objective: To compare the costs of dupilumab and omalizumab for treating severe allergic asthma patients from the perspective of the Brazilian private healthcare system. Methods: Using clinical and demographic inputs from the literature, we simulated a cohort of 5,000 severe allergic asthma patients and estimated the treatment cost with omalizumab. Results: In the simulated cohort, 81.3% were female, the mean body weight was 75.1 kg (SD 13.1), and the mean serum IgE was 532 IU/mL (SD 688). All patients were eligible for treatment with dupilumab, but 830 (16.6%) were ineligible for treatment with omalizumab due to serum IgE level and/or body weight combinations, according to the product label. Over four weeks, the mean dose of omalizumab was 537 mg (SD 285). The annual mean per-patient cost for treatment with omalizumab was BRL 110,783.89 (SD 58,385.81), ranging from BRL 31,797.49 to BRL 246,643.15. The treatment cost with dupilumab is BRL 111,724.21 for the first year and BRL 107,599.91 for subsequent years. Conclusions: We observed slightly lower mean treatment costs with dupilumab than with omalizumab. However, while the treatment cost with dupilumab is fixed and predictable, the treatment cost with omalizumab is highly variable, depending on patients' characteristics. Health managers should consider these findings for reimbursement and clinical protocol development decisions.

Objetivo: Comparar os custos de dupilumabe e omalizumabe para o tratamento de pacientes com asma alérgica grave na perspectiva do sistema de saúde privado brasileiro. Métodos: Utilizando parâmetros clínicos e demográficos a partir de dados da literatura, simulamos uma coorte com 5.000 pacientes com asma alérgica grave e estimamos o custo de tratamento com o omalizumabe. Resultados: Na coorte simulada, 81,3% eram do sexo feminino, com peso médio de 75,1 kg (DP 13,1) e IgE sérica de 532 IU/mL (DP 688). Todos os pacientes eram elegíveis para o tratamento com dupilumabe, porém 830 (16,6%) não eram elegíveis para o tratamento com omalizumabe devido a combinações específicas de IgE sérica e/ou peso corporal, de acordo com a bula do produto. Para o período de 4 semanas, a dose média de omalizumabe foi de 537 mg (DP 285). O custo médio anual por paciente do tratamento com omalizumabe foi de R$ 110.783,89 (DP 58.385,81), variando de R$ 31.797,49 a R$ 246.643,15. O custo do tratamento com dupilumabe é de R$ 111.724,21 no primeiro ano e R$ 107.599,91 nos anos seguintes. Conclusões: Foi observado que o custo médio do tratamento com dupilumabe é ligeiramente menor que o custo com omalizumabe. Todavia, enquanto o custo do tratamento com dupilumabe é fixo e previsível, o custo do tratamento com omalizumabe é altamente variável, dependendo de características dos pacientes. Esses achados devem ser considerados pelos gestores de saúde para decisões sobre reembolso e desenvolvimento de protocolos clínicos.

BNT162b2 against COVID-19 in Brazil using a test-negative design: Study protocol and statistical analysis plan.

INTRODUCTION: Real-world data on COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness are needed to validate evidence from randomized clinical trials. Accordingly, this study aims to evaluate, in a real-world setting in Brazil, the effectiveness of Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 against symptomatic COVID-19 and COVID-19-related complications across diverse populations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A test-negative case-control study with follow-up of cases is currently being conducted in Toledo, a city in southern Brazil, following a mass COVID-19 vaccination campaign with BNT162b2. The study is being conducted among patients aged 12 years or older seeking care in the public health system with acute respiratory symptoms and tested for SARS-CoV-2 on reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Cases are RT-PCR positive and controls RT-PCR negative. Test-positive cases are prospectively followed through structured telephone interviews performed at 15 days post-enrollment, and at 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. Baseline demographic, clinical, and vaccination data are being collected by means of structured interviews and medical registry records reviews at the time of enrollment. All RT-PCR-positive samples are screened for mutations to identify SARS-CoV-2 variants. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol has been approved by the research ethics committee of all participant sites. Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. TRAIL REGISTRATION: Clinicatrials.gov: NCT05052307.