RESUMO
Equine asthma is considered a non-infectious respiratory disease characterized by inflammation and hypersensitivity. Given the importance of antimicrobial stewardship, an international survey was designed to investigate the use of antimicrobials in asthmatic horses and the factors influencing prescription behavior. An online survey was distributed in six languages by international mailing lists and social media from December 2020 to January 2022. Of the 434 responses recorded, 249 veterinarians working in 25 countries finished the survey. These included 79 ECEIM/ACVIM diplomats. A total of 204 respondents confirmed national regulations concerning antimicrobial use in their country. Knowledge of the asthma definitions as presented in the revised ACVIM consensus statement was greater in veterinarians treating over 95% of equine patients compared to veterinarians treating more species, based on 10 questions (answers consistent with the consensus statement in 7 (IQR 5-9) and 4 (IQR 3-6) questions, respectively, (p < 0.001)). A total of 131 respondents stated to use antimicrobials (at least 'sometimes') in at least one of the three presented cases consistent with equine asthma. Trimethoprim-Sulfa combinations, penicillin(s), and tetracyclines were prescribed most (by 105, 53 and 38 veterinarians, respectively). Aminoglycosides, cephalosporins and fluoroquinolones were also selected (22, 15, 9 veterinarians respectively). Tetracyclines and cephalosporins are prescribed more often by veterinarians working without national regulations (p 0.019 and p 0.035, respectively). The most selected factors influencing prescription behavior were: 'tracheal wash culture' (62% of 131 veterinarians using antimicrobials in these cases), 'whether other horses in the barn have similar complaints' (60%), and 'response to other forms of therapy' (53%). In conclusion, insight into prescription behavior is the first step towards minimizing and optimizing antimicrobial use.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Bevacizumab or cetuximab represent the standard treatment in association with classical chemotherapy in confirmed metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Bevacizumab could be continued after the first disease progression with an overall survival (OS) advantage, compared to chemotherapy alone, but the optimal dose remains a debatable issue. METHODS: In a retrospective analysis of mCRC patients treated with bevacizumab, we selected patients with administration beyond progression, and stratified them according to the dose received- same dose bevacizumab (SDB) as first-line chemotherapy or double dose bevacizumab (DDB). For each group we evaluated OS, time to treatment failure (TTF) and progression-free survival in the first-line (PFS1) and in the second-line (PFS2). RESULTS: In the first-line therapy, oxaliplatin backbone regimen was used in 73% SDB, compared with 22.5% DDB patients, while irinotecan was used in 75% DDB and 27% SDB patients. Second-line oxaliplatin was given to 50% DDB and 29.7% SDB patients, while irinotecan was administered to 47.5% DDB and 70.3% SDB patients. The median values were: OS - 41 months in the DDB group and 25 months in the SDB group (p = 0.01); TTF - 24 months in the DDB group and 19 months in the SDB group (p=0.009); PFS1 - 17 months in the DDB group and 12 months in the SDB group (p=0.008); PFS2 - 9 months in the DDB group and 5 months in the SDB group (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Doubling the dose of bevacizumab at progression seems to provide OS and PFS advantage for mCRC patients.
