A phase II, single-center, double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial to explore the efficacy and safety of intravenous melatonin in surgical patients with severe sepsis admitted to the intensive care unit.

To determine whether IV melatonin therapy improves redox status and inflammatory responses in surgical patients with severe sepsis, a unicenter, phase II double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial was carried out. The study included patients with severe sepsis marked by infectious systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), associated with organ dysfunction, hypoperfusion or hypotension requiring surgical intervention. IV melatonin at a daily dose of 60 mg, which was dissolved in 500 ml of 5% dextrose serum, was continuously administered to the patients for over 30 min starting on the day of the diagnoses during a 5-day period. A total of 14 patients received a placebo treatment and 15 melatonin doses. Redox status decreased in melatonin-treated patients during the 5 days of treatment as compared to the placebo-treated patients. Procalcitonin performed better in the melatonin group, whose neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio was also significantly reduced, resulting in an improved evolution of the disease. Moreover, hospital stays decreased by 19.60% from 26.64 days for the placebo group to 21.42 days for the melatonin group. The placebo group recorded five mortalities, as compared to three for the melatonin group. IV melatonin administration improved the course of the disease in surgical patients with severe sepsis, with no side effects. Additional studies with higher doses of melatonin and a long duration of therapy need to be carried out to assess its clinical use.

Controversies in the management of adjuvant breast cancer with taxanes: review of the current literature.

Taxanes offer clear benefits in adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer. This review examines evidence to date on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of their use in the adjuvant treatment of women with early breast cancer, based on three meta-analyses, one systematic review, five clinical practice guidelines and 16 randomized clinical trials. Against the background of a major increase in the use of docetaxel rather than paclitaxel in our setting over the past few years, implying a major increase in costs, we examined whether this higher use of docetaxel is supported by the available evidence. In this wide study, we found no evidence that regimens containing docetaxel yield greater benefits than those including paclitaxel. From an effectiveness standpoint, the change from paclitaxel to docetaxel in our setting is not justified.