Baricitinib plus Remdesivir for Hospitalized Adults with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is associated with dysregulated inflammation. The effects of combination treatment with baricitinib, a Janus kinase inhibitor, plus remdesivir are not known. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluating baricitinib plus remdesivir in hospitalized adults with Covid-19. All the patients received remdesivir (≤10 days) and either baricitinib (≤14 days) or placebo (control). The primary outcome was the time to recovery. The key secondary outcome was clinical status at day 15. RESULTS: A total of 1033 patients underwent randomization (with 515 assigned to combination treatment and 518 to control). Patients receiving baricitinib had a median time to recovery of 7 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 6 to 8), as compared with 8 days (95% CI, 7 to 9) with control (rate ratio for recovery, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.32; P = 0.03), and a 30% higher odds of improvement in clinical status at day 15 (odds ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0 to 1.6). Patients receiving high-flow oxygen or noninvasive ventilation at enrollment had a time to recovery of 10 days with combination treatment and 18 days with control (rate ratio for recovery, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.10 to 2.08). The 28-day mortality was 5.1% in the combination group and 7.8% in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.09). Serious adverse events were less frequent in the combination group than in the control group (16.0% vs. 21.0%; difference, -5.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -9.8 to -0.3; P = 0.03), as were new infections (5.9% vs. 11.2%; difference, -5.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -8.7 to -1.9; P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Baricitinib plus remdesivir was superior to remdesivir alone in reducing recovery time and accelerating improvement in clinical status among patients with Covid-19, notably among those receiving high-flow oxygen or noninvasive ventilation. The combination was associated with fewer serious adverse events. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04401579.).

The Role of Systems Vaccinology in Understanding the Immune Defects to Vaccination in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients.

Solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) are at increased risk for many infections, whether viral, bacterial, or fungal, due to immunosuppressive therapy to prevent organ rejection. The same immune defects that render transplanted patients susceptible to infection dampen their immune response to vaccination. Therefore, it is vital to identify immune defects to vaccination in transplant recipients and methods to obviate them. These methods can include alternative vaccine composition, dosage, adjuvants, route of administration, timing, and re-vaccination strategies. Systems biology is a relatively new field of study, which utilizes high throughput means to better understand biological systems and predict outcomes. Systems biology approaches have been used to help obtain a global picture of immune responses to infections and vaccination (i.e. systems vaccinology), but little work has been done to use systems biology to improve vaccine efficacy in immunocompromised patients, particularly SOTRs, thus far. Systems vaccinology approaches may hold key insights to vaccination in this vulnerable population.

Triplex Real-Time RT-PCR for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2.

Most reverse transcription PCR protocols for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) include 2-3 targets for detection. We developed a triplex, real-time reverse transcription PCR for SARS-CoV-2 that maintained clinical performance compared with singleplex assays. This protocol could streamline detection and decrease reagent use during current high SARS-CoV-2 testing demands.

Treatable Genetic Metabolic Epilepsies.

OPINION STATEMENT: In the absence of a culprit epileptogenic lesion, pharmacoresistant seizures should prompt the physician to consider potentially treatable metabolic epilepsies, especially in the presence of developmental delays. Even though the anti-seizure treatment of the epilepsies remains symptomatic and usually tailored to an electroclinical phenotype rather than to an underlying etiology, a thorough metabolic workup might reveal a disease with an etiology-specific treatment. Early diagnosis is essential in the case of treatable metabolic epilepsies allowing timely intervention. Despite the advances in genetic testing, biochemical testing including cerebrospinal fluid studies are still needed to expedite the diagnostic workup and potential therapeutic trials. The diagnostician should have a high index of suspicion despite potential clinical digressions from seminal publications describing the initial cases, as these index patients may represent the most severe form of the condition rather than its most common presenting form. The often gratifying developmental outcome and seizure control with early treatment calls for a prompt diagnostic consideration of treatable metabolic diseases; even though relatively rare or potentially only seemingly so.

Pharmacists' views and reported practices in relation to a new generic drug substitution policy in Lebanon: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Governments in both developed and developing countries have adopted generic drug substitution policies to decrease pharmaceutical expenditures and improve access to medicine. In August 2015, the Ministry of Public Health (MOPH) in Lebanon introduced generic drug substitution and a unified medical prescription form as policy instruments to promote generic drug use. The objective of this exploratory study was to examine the attitudes of community pharmacists and the reported practices in relation to the implementation of the new generic drug substitution policy. METHODS: We used a cross-sectional mixed methods approach composed of self-administered questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. The study population consisted of community pharmacists in Lebanon. We randomly approached one pharmacy personnel from each selected community pharmacy. We conducted descriptive analyses to assess responses to questionnaire and regression analyses to understand associations between responses and respondent demographics. We analyzed qualitative data thematically. RESULTS: Out of 204 invited community pharmacies, 153 pharmacies participated (75% response rate). The majority of respondents (64%) were in favor of generic drug substitution; however, less than half (40%) indicated they have substituted brand drugs for generic equivalents. Moreover, 57% indicated that the existing pricing system discourages them from performing generic drug substitution. Most respondents indicated that physicians are overusing the "non-substitutable" option (84%) and that there are technical problems with processing the new prescription form (78%). Less than half (47%) reported that the MOPH is performing regular audits on the forms collected by the pharmacy. While 45% of the respondents indicated that consumers have accepted most of the generic substitutions, 21% perceived the increase in generic drug dispensing to be significant. Findings suggested a potentially significant association between being informed about generic drugs and respondents' support of the policy. Suggested strategies to address implementation challenges included strengthening stewardship function of MOPH, securing full commitment of health care providers, conducting educational and awareness campaigns about generic drugs and generic drug substitution, and aligning incentive systems of the key stakeholders. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of community pharmacists were supportive of generic drug substitution in general but not of the current implementation of the policy in Lebanon. Findings revealed implementation challenges at the provider, patient, and system level which are hindering attainment of the policy objectives. The key lessons derived from this study can be used for continuous improvement of the policy and its implementation.