Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 44
Filter
1.
Oncologist ; 27(12): 1034-1040, 2022 12 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36239399

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Despite multiple randomized trials, the role of perioperative chemotherapy in colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM) is still under debate. In this systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA), we aim to evaluate the efficacy of perioperative systemic therapies for patients with CRLM. METHODS: We searched various databases for abstracts and full-text articles published from database inception through May 2021.We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the addition of perioperative (post, pre, or both) systemic therapies to surgery alone in patients with CRLM. The outcomes were compared according to the chemotherapy regimen using a random effects model. Outcomes of interest included disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Seven RCTs with a total of 1504 patients with CRLM were included. Six studies included post-operative treatment and one evaluated perioperative (pre- and postoperative) therapy. Fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy was the most used systemic therapy. NMA showed benefit of adding perioperative therapy to surgery in terms of DFS (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.84). However, these findings did not translate into a statistically significant OS benefit (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.05). NMA did not show any advantage of one regimen over another including oxaliplatin or irinotecan. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and NMA of 7 RCTs found that the addition of perioperative systemic treatment for resectable CRLM could improve disease-free survival but not overall survival. Based on the findings, addition of perioperative treatment in resectable CRLM should be individualized weighing the risks and benefits.


Subject(s)
Liver Neoplasms , Humans , Network Meta-Analysis , Liver Neoplasms/drug therapy , Liver Neoplasms/surgery
2.
Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent) ; 33(3): 326-330, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32675947

ABSTRACT

Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) is an underrecognized disorder due to the variability of its presentation and the fact that in adults, its diagnosis is based on cumbersome, pediatric-based criteria. Data regarding demographics, underlying causes, clinical features, laboratory results, complications, treatments received, and clinical outcomes were collected and analyzed in 41 patients who were diagnosed and treated at University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences between 2007 and 2019. In this group, 51% were male, the median age at diagnosis was 47 years, and 85% (35/41) met the HLH-2004 diagnostic criteria (5/8 variables). When evaluating seven extended variables easily obtained by routine laboratory test, 93% (38/41) of patients met 8 out of 15 criteria. The overall mortality in our patient population was 54% (22/41). The 30-day and 1-year overall survival estimates were 0.73 (95% confidence interval 0.56, 0.84) and 0.46 (95% confidence interval 0.29, 0.62), respectively. Thirty-five patients (85.4%) received HLH-directed therapy, and 19 patients (46.3%) achieved remission. The most common regimen for treating HLH was dexamethasone plus etoposide (53.7%). The patients with malignancy-related HLH had a worse prognosis than those without underlying malignancy, with a 73.33% (11/15) vs 34.62% (9/26) mortality (P = 0.02). In conclusion, despite increasing recognition, HLH remains an enigmatic disorder with increased mortality, even more so with malignancy-associated HLH.

3.
Avicenna J Med ; 10(2): 68-75, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32500045

ABSTRACT

Over the last 5 years, there have been more than 140 new drug approvals in the field of Oncology alone, all based on newly published clinical trials. These approvals have led to an ongoing change in clinical practice, offering new therapeutic options for patients. Therefore, it is important for healthcare providers to be able to appraise a clinical trial and determine its validity, understand its results, and be able to apply such results to their patients. In this guide, we provide a simplified approach tailored to practicing clinicians and trainees. The same concepts and principles apply to other medical specialties.

4.
JAMA Oncol ; 6(3): e194489, 2020 03 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31855256

ABSTRACT

Importance: In metastatic colorectal cancer, induction combination chemotherapy with a targeted agent is considered the mainstay of treatment. Multiple randomized clinical trials have examined different strategies of continuing cytotoxic therapy until progression compared with a period of either observation or the use of various maintenance agents. However, those randomized clinical trials have shown inconsistent efficacy results that make it challenging to draw any conclusion on which strategy is preferred. Therefore, a network meta-analysis is helpful to compare different agents across randomized clinical trials. Objective: To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of different treatment strategies for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Evidence Review: MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for randomized clinical trials evaluating different strategies for patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. Trials of interest included those including patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who were treated with an initial period of cytotoxic chemotherapy (with or without a biologic) and then switched to one of the following strategies: observation; maintenance with bevacizumab (Bev), fluoropyrimidine (FP), or both (FP + Bev); or continuing the induction regimen until progression. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The overall effect was pooled using the DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model. Network meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects consistency model to pool evidence from direct and indirect comparisons. Agents were ranked using surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities. Higher SUCRA scores correspond to greater efficacy. Initial analysis was performed on December 18, 2018. An updated search was performed in April 2019, and no additional studies were added. Findings: Twelve trials at low risk of bias (5540 patients; age range, 23-85 years; 64.4 % male) were included. Network meta-analysis showed no benefit of continuing full cytotoxic chemotherapy until progression vs observation in terms of PFS (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.46-1.09) and OS (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.85-1.07). Compared with observation, maintenance therapy showed a PFS benefit (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.43-0.77) but not an OS benefit (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.83-1.01). All maintenance strategies (FP, FP + Bev, and Bev) showed significant improvement in PFS vs observation. On SUCRA analysis, maintenance treatment (FP or FP + Bev) had the highest likelihood of achieving improved PFS (67.1% for FP, 99.8% for FP + Bev, and 36.5% for Bev) and OS (81.3% for FP, 73.2% for FP + Bev, and 32.6% for Bev). Conclusions and Relevance: For patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, there is no benefit to continuing the full induction regimen until progression, without a period of either observation or maintenance treatment. A maintenance strategy with a fluoropyrimidine, with or without the addition of bevacizumab, is preferred. However, given the lack of a clear OS benefit, shared decision-making should include observation as an acceptable alternative.


Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms/drug therapy , Maintenance Chemotherapy , Colorectal Neoplasms/mortality , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Humans , Network Meta-Analysis , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
5.
Oncologist ; 24(9): 1174-1179, 2019 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31164455

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Regorafenib at different dosing strategies and TAS-102 are treatment options for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We aimed to evaluate the comparative effectiveness evidence supporting these different strategies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched different databases for randomized controlled trials evaluating TAS-102 or regorafenib in patients with refractory mCRC who failed prior oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and fluoropyrimidine. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The overall effect was pooled using the DerSimonian random effects model. We conducted network meta-analysis based on White's multivariate meta-regression to pool evidence from direct and indirect comparisons. RESULTS: Six trials at low risk of bias (2,445 patients) were included. Direct comparisons showed that Rego 160 and TAS-102 as monotherapy were superior to best-supportive care (BSC) in terms of PFS (Rego 160: hazard ratio [HR], 0.4; 95% confidence ratio [CI], 0.26-0.63; TAS-102: HR, 0.46 CI, 0.40-0.52) and OS (Rego 160: HR, 0.67; CI, 0.48-0.93; TAS-102: HR, 0.67; CI, 0.57-0.80). Network analysis showed no statistically difference in PFS or OS between Rego 160 and TAS-102. Rego 80+ was superior to BSC in terms of OS (HR, 0.44; CI, 0.23-0.84) and PFS (HR, 0.37; CI, 0.21-0.66). Rego 80+ was associated with statistically nonsignificant improvement in OS and PFS compared with TAS-102 and Rego 160. CONCLUSION: Regorafenib 160 and TAS-102 appear to have similar efficacy. Rego 80+ is shown to be superior to BSC. A trend for improved OS was observed with Rego 80+ versus Rego 160 or TAS 102. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Regorafenib at a dose of 160 mg and TAS-102 appear to have similar efficacy in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Regorafenib with a dose escalation strategy is superior to best-supportive care. Given its tolerability and the observed trend in survival benefit compared with regorafenib 160, dose escalation strategy of regorafenib (80+) may be the preferred option in this setting.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Colorectal Neoplasms/drug therapy , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Drug Combinations , Drug Resistance, Neoplasm , Humans , Neoplasm Metastasis , Phenylurea Compounds/administration & dosage , Pyridines/administration & dosage , Pyrrolidines/administration & dosage , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Survival Rate , Thymine , Treatment Outcome , Trifluridine/administration & dosage , Uracil/administration & dosage , Uracil/analogs & derivatives
6.
BMJ Support Palliat Care ; 9(4): 425-433, 2019 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30948447

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Multiple studies have questioned the benefit of neutropenic diets in decreasing infections in patients with cancer, but recent surveys showed that such diets are still prescribed. In this study, we sought to evaluate the effectiveness of neutropenic diet in decreasing infection and mortality in neutropenic patients with cancer with neutropenia. This review is an update of a previously published systematic review. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched different databases to identify comparative studies that investigated the effect of neutropenic diet compared with regular diet in neutropenic adults and children with cancer. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses using the Der-Simonian and Laird method to pool treatment effects from included studies. Outcomes of interest were mortality, bacteremia/fungemia, major infections, quality of life, and the composite outcome for neutropenic fever and/or infection. RESULTS: We included six studies (five randomised) with 1116 patients, with 772 (69.1%) having underwent haematopoietic cell transplant. There was no statistically significant difference between neutropenic diet and regular diet in the rates of major infections (relative risk [RR] 1.16; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.42) or bacteremia/fungemia (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.60 to 1.53). In haematopoietic cell transplant patients, neutropenic diet was associated with a slightly higher risk of infections (RR 1.25; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.54). No difference in mortality was seen between neutropenic diet and regular diet (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.50). CONCLUSION: There is currently no evidence to support the use of neutropenic diet or other food restrictions in neutropenic patients with cancer. Patients and clinicians should continue to follow the safe food-handling guidelines as recommended by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.


Subject(s)
Bacterial Infections/prevention & control , Neoplasms/complications , Neutropenia/diet therapy , Adult , Child , Diet , Humans , Neutropenia/complications
7.
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant ; 25(4): 728-733, 2019 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30471339

ABSTRACT

Fludarabine with busulfan (FB) or melphalan (FM) are 2 more commonly used reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens for allogeneic stem cell transplantation (HCT).We present a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing these 2 RIC regimens. We searched electronic databases from inception through November 1, 2017 for literature searches to identify relevant studies. A DerSimonian random effects model was used to measure efficacy outcomes; hazard ratios (HRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are reported. Seven studies, including a total of 1955 patients, met criteria for inclusion, of which 6 were included in the overall pooled analysis because of repetition of some patients in 2 studies. Three studies were included in the subgroup analysis of acute myelogenous leukemia (AML)/myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and 2 in the subgroup analysis of lymphoid malignancies. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival were not statistically significantly different between the 2 RIC regimens in analysis of all studies. However, OS was better with FM in subgroup analysis of AML/MDS studies (HR, .83; 95% CI, .73 to .95). Nonrelapse mortality was lower with FB (HR, .64; 95% CI, .46 to .89), whereas relapse was lower with FM (HR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.13 to 2.06) in the analysis of all studies. This meta-analysis shows that FB and FM are associated with a similar OS in patients undergoing HCT. Relapse rates are lower with FM but at the cost of higher nonrelapse mortality.


Subject(s)
Busulfan/therapeutic use , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation/methods , Immunosuppressive Agents/therapeutic use , Melphalan/therapeutic use , Transplantation Conditioning/methods , Transplantation, Homologous/methods , Vidarabine/analogs & derivatives , Busulfan/pharmacology , Female , Humans , Immunosuppressive Agents/pharmacology , Male , Melphalan/pharmacology , Vidarabine/pharmacology , Vidarabine/therapeutic use
8.
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant ; 25(2): 239-247, 2019 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30244101

ABSTRACT

Autologous stem cell transplantation (SCT) is the standard of care for all transplantation-eligible patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma (MM). Various studies have compared clinical outcomes with frontline SCT ("early SCT") versus standard-dose therapy (SDT) alone, with or without salvage SCT ("SDT/late SCT"). In this meta-analysis, we compare overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) outcomes between these 2 treatment approaches. Twelve studies were identified, including a total of 3633 patients, of whom 1811 received early SCT and 1822 received SDT/late SCT. In our analysis of all 12 studies, OS was not significantly different between the 2 groups (hazard ratio [HR], .86; 95% confidence interval [CI], .70 to 1.04), but PFS was better with early SCT (HR, .67; 95% CI, .54 to .82). In a subgroup analysis of 3 studies in which novel agents were used for induction, OS again was similar in the 2 groups, and PFS was favorable with early SCT (HR, .50; 95% CI, .36 to .70). This analysis shows that over the years, early SCT has been associated with prolonged PFS, but this did not consequently translate into prolonged OS in patients with newly diagnosed MM. The benefit of early SCT in terms of OS is less clear in the era of novel agents, given the limited follow-up of these studies.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation , Multiple Myeloma/therapy , Transplantation Conditioning , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Humans , Multiple Myeloma/mortality , Transplantation, Autologous
9.
Eur Urol Oncol ; 1(2): 101-108, 2018 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30345423

ABSTRACT

CONTEXT: The role of antiangiogenic agents in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is well established. However, it is still not clear whether this benefit can be extrapolated to the adjuvant setting. OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy and safety of antiangiogenic agents in patients with RCC and a high risk of relapse after nephrectomy. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the use of any oral antiangiogenic agent compared to placebo in post-nephrectomy RCC patients. Prespecified data elements were extracted from each trial. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). The overall effect was pooled using the DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Three RCTs comparing antiangiogenics to placebo among 3693 patients met our inclusion criteria and were used in meta-analyses. Overall, antiangiogenics did not improve DFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78-1.07) or OS (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.79-1.25). These results persisted when restricting the analysis to patients with clear cell carcinoma and patients with highest risk of relapse. Similarly, sunitinib did not show any improvement in the entire cohort for either DFS (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.67-1.19) or OS (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.90-1.37). CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis, antiangiogenics did not improve OS and DFS over placebo in high-risk RCC after nephrectomy. Further studies are needed to identify the patient population that might derive a benefit from antiangiogenics in the adjuvant setting. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this article, we found that there is currently insufficient evidence to support the use of oral antiangiogenics in nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma after nephrectomy. In addition, the use of oral antiangiogenics was associated with a 2.7-fold higher rate of significant side effects compared to placebo.

10.
Syst Rev ; 7(1): 144, 2018 09 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30227896

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Hypomethylating agents (HMA), azacitidine, and decitabine are frequently used in the management of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). However, there are no clinical trials that have directly compared these agents. We conducted a systematic review and indirectly compared the efficacy of azacitidine to decitabine in MDS. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus) through June 28, 2018, without language or time restrictions. Studies were screened by two independent reviewers, and differences were resolved by consensus. The fixed effect model and adjusted indirect comparison methods were used to pool relative risks (RR) of major outcomes of interest (mortality, response rate, quality of life, hematologic improvement, hospitalization, leukemia transformation, transfusion independence). RESULTS: Only four trials met the eligibility criteria. Two trials compared azacitidine to the best supportive care (BSC) and included 549 patients, and the other two compared decitabine to BSC and included 403 patients. The risk of bias was unclear overall. Compared to BSC, azacitidine was significantly associated with lower mortality (RR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.74-0.94, I2 = 89%) whereas decitabine did not significantly reduce mortality (RR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.77-1.00, I2 = 53%). Both drugs were associated with higher partial and complete response compared to BSC. Indirect comparisons were not statistically significant for all the studied outcomes, except for complete response where azacitidine was less likely to induce complete response compared to decitabine (RR = 0.11, 95% CI = 0.01-0.86, very low-certainty evidence). CONCLUSIONS: Azacitidine and decitabine are both associated with improved outcomes compared to BSC. The available indirect evidence comparing the two agents warrants very low certainty and cannot reliably confirm the superiority of either agent. Head-to-head trials are needed. In the meantime, the choice of agent should be driven by patient preferences, adverse effects, drug availability, and cost.


Subject(s)
Azacitidine , Decitabine , Myelodysplastic Syndromes , Network Meta-Analysis , Humans , Azacitidine/analogs & derivatives , Azacitidine/therapeutic use , Blood Transfusion , Decitabine/therapeutic use , Mortality , Myelodysplastic Syndromes/drug therapy , Quality of Life
11.
Avicenna J Med ; 8(1): 24-33, 2018.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29404270

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Research is crucial for health-care delivery. However, medical students may not participate in research during their training, which might negatively affect their understanding of the importance of research and their future ability to conduct research projects. This is more prominent in developing countries. We aim to assess the attitudes of a sample of Syrian medical students toward research and suggest plausible solutions to reduce their self-reported barriers. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a self-administered, pretested questionnaire. RESULTS: Three hundred and twenty-three responses were included. Most students demonstrated positive attitudes toward research. However, most of the responses indicated that they did not receive any training in academic writing or research and therefore did not have the opportunity to participate in formal research projects or scholarly writing. Students reported various types of barriers that challenged their progress in the field of research. Students who reported being encouraged by their professors to participate in research and writing/publishing scientific papers or reported receiving training about these activities were more likely to participate in research projects or writing scientific articles. CONCLUSION: Students have positive attitudes toward research and publication while they reported poor education, limited participation, and presence of many barriers that impede their participation in such activities.

12.
J Oncol Pharm Pract ; 24(6): 468-472, 2018 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28625074

ABSTRACT

The field of gut microbiota is of growing interest, especially in the recent discoveries of its interaction with host immune responses, which when disrupted, can further alter immunity. It also plays a role in cancer development, its microenvironment and response to anticancer therapeutics. Several recently published experimental studies had explored the efficacy of modifying microbiota to enhance the response of checkpoint inhibitors, suggesting its beneficial function in cancer management and potential to be targeted as a therapeutic agent to enhance efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors. Here we review available evidence, mechanisms and hypotheses of its use to enhance cancer response.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Gastrointestinal Microbiome , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Humans
13.
Cancer ; 123(23): 4680-4686, 2017 Dec 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28817187

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There are limited therapeutic options for treatment-refractory pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), with a paucity of data to support the best option after progression on gemcitabine-based regimens. The authors performed a meta-analysis to determine the effectiveness of adding oxaliplatin (OX) or various irinotecan formulations to a fluoropyrimidine (FP) after first-line treatment progression in patients with PDAC. METHODS: Different databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane, were searched to identify randomized controlled trials comparing FP monotherapy versus FP combination therapy that included either oxaliplatin (FPOX) or various irinotecan formulations (FPIRI) in patients with PDAC who progressed after first-line treatment. Secondary analyses were planned to assess the effectiveness of FPOX and FPIRI compared with FP. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Five studies with 895 patients were identified. Patients randomized to receive FPIRI/FPOX had a significantly improved PFS and a trend toward improved OS compared with those who received FP monotherapy. When comparing FPIRI with FP, there was an improvement in both PFS (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.47-0.87; P = .005) and OS (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.55-0.89; P = .004) in patients who received the combination. Conversely, FPOX produced only a modest improvement in PFS with no improvement in OS. CONCLUSIONS: Combination chemotherapy with OX or various IRI formulations appears to improve PFS compared with single-agent FP. FPIRI, but not FPOX, appears to confer an OS advantage. The combination of FP with irinotecan formulations appears to be the appropriate next line of treatment upon progression after gemcitabine-based chemotherapy regimens. Cancer 2017;123:4680-4686. © 2017 American Cancer Society.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal/drug therapy , Pancreatic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Salvage Therapy , Humans , Prognosis , Pancreatic Neoplasms
14.
Avicenna J Med ; 7(3): 103-109, 2017.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28791242

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: A group of Arab-American physicians and researchers in the United States organized a blended online course in academic writing and publishing in medicine targeting medical students and physicians in war-torn Syria. This was an effort to address one of the reasons behind the poor quantity and quality of scientific research papers in Syria and the Arab region. In this paper, we report on the design, conduct, and outcome of this course and attempt to evaluate its effectiveness. METHODS: The educational intervention was a 2-month blended online course. We administered a questionnaire to assess satisfaction and self-reported improvement in knowledge, confidence, and skills of academic writing and publishing. RESULTS: The course succeeded in reaching more than 2588 physicians and medical students from the region; 159 of them completed most of the course. Eighty-three percent of the participants felt that they were confident enough to write an academic paper after the course and 95% felt the learning objectives were achieved with an average student satisfaction of 8.4 out of 10. CONCLUSION: Physicians in Syria and neighboring countries are in need of training to become an active part of the global scientific community and to document and communicate the crisis their countries are going through from a medical perspective. Low-cost online educational initiatives help respond, at least partially, to those needs.

15.
Avicenna J Med ; 7(3): 133-136, 2017.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28791248

ABSTRACT

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) is a B-cell lymphocytic neoplasm with indolent clinical course. If identified early, observation is opted. Many variables lead to the initiation of treatment. Authors describe a 62-year-old male presenting with shortness of breath and found to have white cell count of 1360 × 109/L and subsequently was diagnosed with CLL/SLL. The patient received leukapheresis along with tumor lysis treatment and systemic chemotherapy with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab regimen. His course was complicated with deep venous thrombosis, extensive cutaneous, and sinus mucosa involvement by CLL/SLL. The patient clinically improved and on follow-up clinic visits documented normalization of his white cell counts. The case report brings up a rare presentation of CLL/SLL with such an extreme high white cell count, leukostasis symptoms and extramedullary involvement of disease and encourages providers to be vigilant of rare presentation of CLL/SLL.

16.
J Oncol Pharm Pract ; 23(8): 620-624, 2017 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27590328

ABSTRACT

Immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors has revolutionized the management of metastatic melanoma. These checkpoints, namely the cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 and the programmed T cell death 1 receptor, possess an inhibitory effect on the T cell function. Pharmacologic inhibition of cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 with ipilimumab and programmed T cell death 1 with either pembrolizumab or nivolumab has resulted in long-term sustained responses among patients with metastatic melanoma. The adverse events of these medications are predominantly immune related. Sarcoidosis-like syndrome/lymphadenopathy represents a challenging adverse event to the oncologist as it can be mistaken for progressive disease. Hence, awareness of such adverse event and obtaining a biopsy of the enlarged lymph nodes will confirm the diagnosis and avoid the unnecessary change of current therapies for those with stage IV disease or adding new ones for those with stage III disease. We report three cases of immunotherapy-related sarcoidosis-like syndrome/lymphadenopathy; two cases occurred during adjuvant ipilimumab for stage III surgically resected melanoma and one case during pemprolizumab for stage IV metastatic melanoma.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/adverse effects , Lymphadenopathy/chemically induced , Melanoma/drug therapy , Sarcoidosis/chemically induced , Skin Neoplasms/drug therapy , Adult , Antibodies, Monoclonal/adverse effects , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , CTLA-4 Antigen/antagonists & inhibitors , Female , Humans , Immunotherapy/methods , Ipilimumab/adverse effects , Lymphadenopathy/diagnostic imaging , Male , Melanoma/diagnostic imaging , Middle Aged , Nivolumab , Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor/antagonists & inhibitors , Sarcoidosis/diagnostic imaging , Skin Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Melanoma, Cutaneous Malignant
17.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 89(4): 746-753, 2017 Mar 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27526953

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Bivalirudin, has been shown to have comparable efficacy and better safety profile when compared to unfractionated heparin (UFH) in percutaneous coronary interventions. Bivalirudin's safety in carotid artery stenting (CAS) was associated with better outcomes than heparin in some studies. In this Meta analysis we examine the hemorrhagic and ischemic outcomes associated with Bivalirudin compared to UFH during CAS. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted with the electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL. Random-effects meta-analysis method was used to pool risk ratio (RR) for both Heparin and Bivalirudin with 95% confidence interval (CI). Study outcomes included hemorrhagic complications; major/minor bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) as well as ischemic complications including ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction, and 30 day mortality. RESULTS: A total of four studies were included enrolling 7,784 patients. Compared to UFH, Bivalirudin was associated with significantly lower major bleeding events with a relative risk (RR) of 0.53 (95% CI: 0.35-0.80; I2 = 0%). Minor bleeding events were significantly lower in the Bivalirudin group with a RR of 0.41 (95% CI: 0.2-0.82; I2 = 0%). Looking into other outcomes, there were no significant differences between anticoagulation strategies in terms of ischemic stroke (RR 0.8, with 95% CI: 0.60-1.06), intracranial hemorrhage (RR 0.73 with 95% CI: 0.27-1.98), myocardial infarction (RR 1.01 with 95% CI: 0.59-1.73) or 30 day mortality (RR 0.83 with 95% CI: 0.47-1.47). CONCLUSION: Compared to UFH, Bivalirudin is associated with lower bleeding risk when used during CAS. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.


Subject(s)
Brain Ischemia/epidemiology , Carotid Stenosis/surgery , Heparin/pharmacology , Hirudins/pharmacology , Peptide Fragments/pharmacology , Postoperative Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Stents , Antithrombins/pharmacology , Brain Ischemia/etiology , Brain Ischemia/prevention & control , Carotid Stenosis/complications , Fibrinolytic Agents/pharmacology , Global Health , Humans , Incidence , Postoperative Hemorrhage/etiology , Postoperative Hemorrhage/prevention & control , Recombinant Proteins/pharmacology
18.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 89(5): 923-931, 2017 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27862881

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is typically performed using embolic protection devices (EPDs) as a means to reduce the risk of procedure-related stroke. In this study, we compared procedural morbidity and mortality associated with distal (D-EPD) vs. proximal (P-EPD) protection. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were queried from January 1998 through May 2015. Only studies comparing (D-EPD) and (P-EPD) were included. Two independent reviewers selected and appraised studies and extracted data in duplicate. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool outcomes across studies. Heterogeneity of treatment effect among studies was assessed using the I2 statistics. Publication bias was assessed using inspection of funnel plots. The primary endpoints included 30-day mortality and stroke. Secondary endpoints included new cerebral lesions on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) and contralateral lesions on DW-MRI. RESULTS: A total of 12,281 patients were included from 18 studies (13 prospective and 5 retrospective) comparing (D-EPD) and (P-EPD) in the setting of CAS. The mean patient age was 69 years and 64% of patients were male. No evidence of publication bias was detected. There was no significant difference between the two modalities in terms of the risk of stroke (risk difference [RD] 0.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.01 to 0.01) or mortality (RD 0.0, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01) nor was there any difference in the incidence of new cerebral lesions on DW-MRI or contralateral DW-MRI lesions. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing CAS, both D-EPD and P-EPD provide similar levels of protection from peri-procedural stroke and 30 days mortality. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.


Subject(s)
Balloon Occlusion/methods , Carotid Stenosis/therapy , Embolic Protection Devices , Intracranial Embolism/prevention & control , Carotid Stenosis/complications , Intracranial Embolism/etiology , Risk Factors
19.
J Vasc Surg ; 64(1): 265, 2016 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27345514
20.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 4: CD009371, 2016 Apr 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27091121

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Fingolimod was approved in 2010 for the treatment of patients with the relapsing-remitting (RR) form of multiple sclerosis (MS). It was designed to reduce the frequency of exacerbations and to delay disability worsening. Issues on its safety and efficacy, mainly as compared to other disease modifying drugs (DMDs), have been raised. OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety and benefit of fingolimod versus placebo, or other disease-modifying drugs (DMDs), in reducing disease activity in people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the Central Nervous System (CNS) Group's Specialised Trials Register and US Food and Drug Administration reports (15 February 2016). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the beneficial and harmful effects of fingolimod versus placebo or other approved DMDs in people with RRMS. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: Six RCTs met our selection criteria. The overall population included 5152 participants; 1621 controls and 3531 treated with fingolimod at different doses; 2061 with 0.5 mg, 1376 with 1.25 mg, and 94 with 5.0 mg daily. Among the controls, 923 participants were treated with placebo and 698 with others DMDs. The treatment duration was six months in three, 12 months in one, and 24 months in two trials. One study was at high risk of bias for blinding, three studies were at high risk of bias for incomplete outcome reporting, and four studies were at high risk of bias for other reasons (co-authors were affiliated with the pharmaceutical company). We retrieved 10 ongoing trials; four of them have been completed.Comparing fingolimod administered at the approved dose of 0.5 mg to placebo, we found that the drug at 24 months increased the probability of being relapse-free (risk ratio (RR) 1.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.28 to 1.63); moderate quality of evidence), but it might lead to little or no difference in preventing disability progression (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.11; primary clinical endpoints; low quality evidence). Benefit was observed for other measures of inflammatory disease activity including clinical (annualised relapse rate): rate ratio 0.50, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.62; moderate quality evidence; and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) activity (gadolinium-enhancing lesions): RR of being free from (MRI) gadolinium-enhancing lesions: 1.36, 95% CI 1.27 to 1.45; low quality evidence.The mean change of MRI T2-weighted lesion load favoured fingolimod at 12 and 24 months.No significant increased risk of discontinuation due to adverse events was observed for fingolimod 0.5 mg compared to placebo at six and 24 months. The risk of fingolimod discontinuation was significantly higher compared to placebo for the dose 1.25 mg at 24 months (RR 1.93, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.52).No significant increased risk of discontinuation due to serious adverse events was observed for fingolimod 0.5 mg compared to placebo at six and 24 months. A significant increased risk of discontinuation due to serious adverse events was found for fingolimod 5.0 mg (RR 2.77, 95% CI 1.04 to 7.38) compared to placebo at six months.Comparing fingolimod 0.5 mg to intramuscular interferon beta-1a, we found moderate quality evidence that the drug at one year slightly increased the number of participants free from relapse (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.27) or from gadolinium-enhancing lesions (RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.19), and decreased the relapse rate (rate ratio 0.48, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.70). We did not detect any advantage for preventing disability progression (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.06; low quality evidence). We did not detect any significant difference for MRI T2-weighted lesion load change.We found a greater likelihood of participants discontinuing fingolimod, as compared to other DMDs, due to adverse events in the short-term (six months) (RR 3.21, 95% CI 1.16 to 8.86), but there was no significant difference versus interferon beta-1a at 12 months (RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.80; moderate quality evidence). A higher incidence of adverse events was suggestive of the lower tolerability rate of fingolimod compared to interferon-beta 1a.Quality of life was improved in participants after switching from a different DMD to fingolimod at six months, but this effect was not found compared to placebo at 24 months.All studies were sponsored by Novartis Pharma. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with fingolimod compared to placebo in RRMS patients is effective in reducing inflammatory disease activity, but it may lead to little or no difference in preventing disability worsening. The risk of withdrawals due to adverse events requires careful monitoring of patients over time. The evidence on the risk/benefit profile of fingolimod compared with intramuscular interferon beta-1a was uncertain, based on a low number of head-to-head RCTs with short follow-up duration. The ongoing trial results will possibly satisfy these issues.


Subject(s)
Fingolimod Hydrochloride/therapeutic use , Immunosuppressive Agents/therapeutic use , Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting/drug therapy , Fingolimod Hydrochloride/adverse effects , Humans , Immunosuppressive Agents/adverse effects , Interferon-beta/therapeutic use , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Time Factors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...