Intranasal Versus Intravenous Dexamethasone to Treat Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Randomized Multicenter Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV2 induces flu-like symptoms that can rapidly progress to severe acute lung injury and even death. The virus also invades the central nervous system (CNS), causing neuroinflammation and death from central failure. Intravenous (IV) or oral dexamethasone (DXM) reduced 28 d mortality in patients who required supplemental oxygen compared to those who received conventional care alone. Through these routes, DMX fails to reach therapeutic levels in the CNS. In contrast, the intranasal (IN) route produces therapeutic levels of DXM in the CNS, even at low doses, with similar systemic bioavailability. AIMS: To compare IN vs. IV DXM treatment in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: A controlled, multicenter, open-label trial. Patients with COVID-19 (69) were randomly assigned to receive IN-DXM (0.12 mg/kg for three days, followed by 0.6 mg/kg for up to seven days) or IV-DXM (6 mg/d for 10 d). The primary outcome was clinical improvement, as defined by the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) ordinal scale. The secondary outcome was death at 28 d between IV and IN patients. Effects of both treatments on biochemical and immunoinflammatory profiles were also recorded. RESULTS: Initially, no significant differences in clinical severity, biometrics, and immunoinflammatory parameters were found between both groups. The NEWS-2 score was reduced, in 23 IN-DXM treated patients, with no significant variations in the 46 IV-DXM treated ones. Ten IV-DXM-treated patients and only one IN-DXM patient died. CONCLUSIONS: IN-DMX reduced NEWS-2 and mortality more efficiently than IV-DXM, suggesting that IN is a more efficient route of DXM administration.

Parenteral nutrition in cancer patients outside of oncologic treatment: Bioethical perspective.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The medical care of a patient with an end-stage disease focus on the pursuit of the patient's quality of life. Many treatments can be used to achieve this goal. In this study, the benefits, and burdens of providing parenteral nutrition to patients diagnosed with end-stage cancer were reviewed and analyzed from a bioethical perspective with the aim of issuing a useful recommendation for decision making. METHODOLOGY: A qualitative convergent study through interviews and a multiple case study was performed. The study is on the decisions to provide parenteral nutrition as an end-of-life treatment for terminal cancer patients treated in Mexico City. Eight physicians specialized in Oncology and Palliative Care were interviewed and 10 clinical records of patients diagnosed with terminal cancer, who were out of oncologic treatment, who received palliative care and were prescribed parenteral nutrition at the end of life were analyzed. RESULTS: The physicians considered parenteral nutrition as an advanced life-sustaining medical treatment and, therefore, susceptible to not being initiated or being withdrawn, according to the patient's clinical situation. Minor complications secondary to parenteral nutrition were found in all the records reviewed, all these patients died in hospital instead of at home. CONCLUSION: When death is certain in the short term and cannot be avoided, the role of feeding and nutrition becomes questionable, especially in cancer patients at the end of life, where parenteral nutrition causes more burden than benefit.

Intranasal dexamethasone: a new clinical trial for the control of inflammation and neuroinflammation in COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: By end December of 2021, COVID-19 has infected around 276 million individuals and caused over 5 million deaths worldwide. Infection results in dysregulated systemic inflammation, multi-organ dysfunction, and critical illness. Cells of the central nervous system are also affected, triggering an uncontrolled neuroinflammatory response. Low doses of glucocorticoids, administered orally or intravenously, reduce mortality among moderate and severe COVID-19 patients. However, low doses administered by these routes do not reach therapeutic levels in the CNS. In contrast, intranasally administered dexamethasone can result in therapeutic doses in the CNS even at low doses. METHODS: This is an approved open-label, multicenter, randomized controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of intranasal versus intravenous dexamethasone administered in low doses to moderate and severe COVID-19 adult patients. The protocol is conducted in five health institutions in Mexico City. A total of 120 patients will be randomized into two groups (intravenous vs. intranasal) at a 1:1 ratio. Both groups will be treated with the corresponding dexamethasone scheme for 10 days. The primary outcome of the study will be clinical improvement, defined as a statistically significant reduction in the NEWS-2 score of patients with intranasal versus intravenous dexamethasone administration. The secondary outcome will be the reduction in mortality during hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: This protocol is currently in progress to improve the efficacy of the standard therapeutic dexamethasone regimen for moderate and severe COVID-19 patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04513184 . Registered November 12, 2020. Approved by La Comisión Federal para la Protección contra Riesgos Sanitarios (COFEPRIS) with identification number DI/20/407/04/36. People are currently being recruited.