Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 3.318
Filtrar
1.
BMJ Case Rep ; 14(2)2021 Feb 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33541971

RESUMO

COVID-19 is a biphasic illness with an initial viraemia phase and later effective adaptive immune phase, except in a minority of people who develop severe disease. Immune regulation is the key target to treat COVID illness. In anticipation, an elderly man self-medicated himself with dexamethasone on the day of symptom onset of a flu-like illness, took other symptomatic measures and was tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. His condition deteriorated with each passing day resulting in hospitalisation. He demanded oxygen and declared as severe COVID. With supportive treatment, he recovered after the 20th day of illness. Immunosuppression and anti-inflammation are likely to benefit when the immune response is dysregulated and turning into a cytokine storm. A medication that has saved many could be the one predisposing to severity if taken as a preventive measure, too early in the disease course, especially the viraemia phase.


Assuntos
Anti-Inflamatórios/efeitos adversos , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Viremia/tratamento farmacológico , Idoso , Anti-Infecciosos/uso terapêutico , Anti-Inflamatórios/uso terapêutico , Dexametasona/uso terapêutico , Hospitalização , Humanos , Hidroxicloroquina/uso terapêutico , Masculino , Pneumonia Viral/complicações , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Automedicação/métodos , Esteroides/efeitos adversos , Esteroides/uso terapêutico , Resultado do Tratamento , Viremia/complicações
2.
Endocrinology ; 162(3)2021 03 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33508121

RESUMO

Treatment for critical illness typically focuses on a patient's short-term physical recovery; however, recent work has broadened our understanding of the long-term implications of illness and treatment strategies. In particular, survivors of critical illness have significantly elevated risk of developing lasting cognitive impairment and psychiatric disorders. In this review, we examine the role of endogenous and exogenous glucocorticoids in neuropsychiatric outcomes following critical illness. Illness is marked by acute elevation of free cortisol and adrenocorticotropic hormone suppression, which typically normalize after recovery; however, prolonged dysregulation can sometimes occur. High glucocorticoid levels can cause lasting alterations to the plasticity and structural integrity of the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex, and this mechanism may plausibly contribute to impaired memory and cognition in critical illness survivors, though specific evidence is lacking. Glucocorticoids may also exacerbate inflammation-associated neural damage. Conversely, current evidence indicates that glucocorticoids during illness may protect against the development of post-traumatic stress disorder. We propose future directions for research in this field, including determining the role of persistent glucocorticoid elevations after illness in neuropsychiatric outcomes, the role of systemic vs neuroinflammation, and probing unexplored lines of investigation on the role of mineralocorticoid receptors and the gut-brain axis. Progress toward personalized medicine in this area has the potential to produce tangible improvements to the lives patients after a critical illness, including Coronavirus Disease 2019.


Assuntos
Disfunção Cognitiva/etiologia , Estado Terminal/psicologia , Glucocorticoides/sangue , Transtornos Mentais/etiologia , Animais , /psicologia , Delírio/sangue , Delírio/etiologia , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Glucocorticoides/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Inflamação/sangue , Inflamação/complicações , Transtornos de Estresse Pós-Traumáticos/sangue
3.
Eur J Pharmacol ; 894: 173854, 2021 Mar 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33428898

RESUMO

The current outbreak of novel COVID-19 challenges the development of an efficient treatment plan as soon as possible. Several promising treatment options stand out as potential therapy of COVID-19, including plasma-derived drugs, monoclonal antibodies, antivirals, antimalarial, cell therapy, and corticosteroids. Dexamethasone an approved corticosteroid medication, acting as an anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressant agent. In the current pandemic, dexamethasone is declared a "major development" in the fight against COVID-19. Steroidal dexamethasone was presented as the recent advancement that significantly reduces the mortality rate among severe COVID-19 cases. This review summarizes the preliminary opinion about the dexamethasone outbreak, therapeutic potential, risks, and strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Assuntos
Anti-Inflamatórios/uso terapêutico , Dexametasona/uso terapêutico , Imunossupressores/uso terapêutico , Pandemias , Anti-Inflamatórios/efeitos adversos , /mortalidade , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Imunossupressores/efeitos adversos , /etiologia
4.
Lancet Haematol ; 8(1): e45-e54, 2021 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33357482

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The introduction of immunomodulatory agents, proteasome inhibitors, and autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation has improved outcomes for patients with multiple myeloma, but patients with high-risk multiple myeloma have a poor long-term prognosis. We aimed to address optimal treatment for these patients. METHODS: SWOG-1211 is a randomised phase 2 trial comparing eight cycles of lenalidomide (25 mg orally on days 1-14 every 21 days), bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 subcutaneously on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 every 21 days), and dexamethasone (20 mg orally on days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, and 12 every 21 days; RVd) induction followed by dose-attenuated RVd maintenance (bortezomib 1 mg/m2 subcutaneously on days 1, 8, and 15; lenalidomide 15 mg orally on days 1-21; dexamethasone 12 mg orally on days 1, 18, and 15 every 28 days) until disease progression with or without elotuzumab (10 mg/kg intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 for cycles 1-2, on days 1 and 11 for cycles 3-8, and on days 1 and 15 during maintenance). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either RVd or RVd-elotuzumab. High-risk multiple myeloma was defined by one of the following: gene expression profiling high risk (GEPhi), t(14;16), t(14;20), del(17p) or amp1q21, primary plasma cell leukaemia and elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase (two times the upper limit of normal or more). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, and all analyses were done on intention-to-treat basis among eligible patients who were evaluable for response. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01668719. FINDINGS: 100 (RVd n=52, RVd-elotuzumab n=48) patients were enrolled between Oct 27, 2013, and May 15, 2016, across 26 cooperative group institutions in the USA. Median age was 64 years (IQR 57-70, range 36-85). 74 (75%) of 99 had International Staging System stage II or stage III disease, 47 (47%) of 99 had amp1q21, 37 (37%) of 100 had del17p, 11 (11%) of 100 had t(14;16), eight (9%) of 90 were GEPhi, seven (7%) of 100 had primary plasma cell leukaemia, five (5%) of 100 had t(14;20), four (4%) of 100 had elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase, and 17 (17%) had two or more features. With a median follow-up of 53 months (IQR 46-59), no difference in median progression-free survival was observed (RVd 33·64 months [95% CI 19·55-not reached], RVd-elotuzumab 31·47 months [18·56-53·98]; hazard ratio 0·968 [80% CI 0·697-1·344]; one-sided p=0·45]. 37 (71%) of 52 patients in the RVd group and 37 (77%) of 48 in the RVd-elotuzumab group had grade 3 or worse adverse events. No significant differences in the safety profile were observed, although some notable results included grade 3-5 infections (four [8%] of 52 in the RVd group, eight [17%] of 48 in the RVd-elotuzumab group), sensory neuropathy (four [8%] of 52 in the RVd group, six [13%] of 48 in the RVd-elotuzumab group), and motor neuropathy (one [2%] of 52 in the RVd group, four [8%] of 48 in the RVd-elotuzumab group). There were no treatment-related deaths in the RVd group and one death in the RVd-elotuzumab group for which study treatment was listed as possibly contributing by the investigator. INTERPRETATION: In the first randomised study of high-risk multiple myeloma reported to date, the addition of elotuzumab to RVd induction and maintenance did not improve patient outcomes. However, progression-free survival in both study groups exceeded the original statistical assumptions and supports the role for continuous proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drug combination maintenance therapy for this patient population. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Leukemia and Lymphoma Society.


Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administração & dosagem , Mieloma Múltiplo , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/administração & dosagem , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/efeitos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Bortezomib/administração & dosagem , Bortezomib/efeitos adversos , Dexametasona/administração & dosagem , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Feminino , Humanos , Lenalidomida/administração & dosagem , Lenalidomida/efeitos adversos , Quimioterapia de Manutenção , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico , Mieloma Múltiplo/genética , Mieloma Múltiplo/metabolismo , Taxa de Sobrevida
5.
JAMA ; 323(24): 2485-2492, June., 2020. tab., graf.
Artigo em Inglês | Sec. Est. Saúde SP, SESSP-IDPCPROD, Sec. Est. Saúde SP | ID: biblio-1123020

RESUMO

IMPORTANCE Corticosteroids are widely used in pediatric cardiac surgery to blunt systemic inflammatory response and to reduce complications; nevertheless, their clinical efficacy is uncertain. OBJECTIVE To determine whether intraoperative administration of dexamethasone is more effective than placebo for reducing major complications and mortality during pediatric cardiac surgery. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The Intraoperative Dexamethasone in Pediatric Cardiac Surgery was an investigator-initiated, double-blind, multicenter randomized trial that involved 4 centers in China, Brazil, and Russia. A total of 394 infants younger than 12 months, undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass were enrolled from December 2015 to October 2018, with follow-up completed in November 2018. INTERVENTIONS The dexamethasone group (n = 194) received 1mg/kg of dexamethasone; the control group (n = 200) received an equivolume of 0.9%sodium chloride intravenously after anesthesia induction. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary end pointwas a composite of death, nonfatalmyocardial infarction, need for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, need for cardiopulmonary resuscitation, acute kidney injury, prolonged mechanical ventilation, or neurological complications within 30 days after surgery. There were 17 secondary end points, including the individual components of the primary end point, and duration of mechanical ventilation, inotropic index, intensive care unit stay, readmission to intensive care unit, and length of hospitalization. RESULTS All of the 394 patients randomized (median age, 6 months; 47.2%boys) completed the trial. The primary end point occurred in 74 patients (38.1%) in the dexamethasone group vs 91 patients (45.5%) in the control group (absolute risk reduction, 7.4%; 95%CI, −0.8%to 15.3%; hazard ratio, 0.82; 95%CI, 0.60 to 1.10; P = .20). Of the 17 prespecified secondary end points, none showed a statistically significant difference between groups. Infections occurred in 4 patients (2.0%) in the dexamethasone group vs 3 patients (1.5%) in the control group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among infants younger than 12 months undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass, intraoperative administration of dexamethasone, compared with placebo, did not significantly reduce major complications and mortality at 30 days. However, the study may have been underpowered to detect a clinically important difference.


Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Recém-Nascido , Criança , Ponte Cardiopulmonar , Complicações Cognitivas Pós-Operatórias , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Cardíacos/mortalidade , Cuidados Intraoperatórios , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Método Duplo-Cego , Glucocorticoides/efeitos adversos
6.
N Engl J Med ; 383(27): 2616-2627, 2020 12 31.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33326713

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Chronic subdural hematoma is a common neurologic disorder that is especially prevalent among older people. The effect of dexamethasone on outcomes in patients with chronic subdural hematoma has not been well studied. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized trial in the United Kingdom that enrolled adult patients with symptomatic chronic subdural hematoma. The patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive a 2-week tapering course of oral dexamethasone, starting at 8 mg twice daily, or placebo. The decision to surgically evacuate the hematoma was made by the treating clinician. The primary outcome was a score of 0 to 3, representing a favorable outcome, on the modified Rankin scale at 6 months after randomization; scores range from 0 (no symptoms) to 6 (death). RESULTS: From August 2015 through November 2019, a total of 748 patients were included in the trial after randomization - 375 were assigned to the dexamethasone group and 373 to the placebo group. The mean age of the patients was 74 years, and 94% underwent surgery to evacuate their hematomas during the index admission; 60% in both groups had a score of 1 to 3 on the modified Rankin scale at admission. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis that excluded the patients who withdrew consent for participation in the trial or who were lost to follow-up, leaving a total of 680 patients, a favorable outcome was reported in 286 of 341 patients (83.9%) in the dexamethasone group and in 306 of 339 patients (90.3%) in the placebo group (difference, -6.4 percentage points [95% confidence interval, -11.4 to -1.4] in favor of the placebo group; P = 0.01). Among the patients with available data, repeat surgery for recurrence of the hematoma was performed in 6 of 349 patients (1.7%) in the dexamethasone group and in 25 of 350 patients (7.1%) in the placebo group. More adverse events occurred in the dexamethasone group than in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Among adults with symptomatic chronic subdural hematoma, most of whom had undergone surgery to remove their hematomas during the index admission, treatment with dexamethasone resulted in fewer favorable outcomes and more adverse events than placebo at 6 months, but fewer repeat operations were performed in the dexamethasone group. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme; Dex-CSDH ISRCTN number, ISRCTN80782810.).


Assuntos
Dexametasona/uso terapêutico , Glucocorticoides/uso terapêutico , Hematoma Subdural Crônico/tratamento farmacológico , Administração Oral , Idoso , Terapia Combinada , Dexametasona/administração & dosagem , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Pessoas com Deficiência , Feminino , Glucocorticoides/administração & dosagem , Glucocorticoides/efeitos adversos , Hematoma Subdural Crônico/complicações , Hematoma Subdural Crônico/mortalidade , Hematoma Subdural Crônico/cirurgia , Humanos , Análise de Intenção de Tratamento , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Reoperação/estatística & dados numéricos , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Resultado do Tratamento
7.
Gan To Kagaku Ryoho ; 47(9): 1325-1330, 2020 Sep.
Artigo em Japonês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33130693

RESUMO

Antiemetic therapy with aprepitant, palonosetron, and dexamethasone is recommended for moderately emetogenic chemotherapy in several guidelines to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. There is a lack of information about the efficacy and safety of antiemetic therapy with aprepitant, palonosetron, and dexamethasone in patients treated with oxaliplatin in Japan. We recruited patients with untreated colorectal cancer who underwent oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. All patients were treated with aprepitant, palonosetron, and dexamethasone. The complete response and complete protection rates were analyzed. A total of 52 patients were enrolled in this clinical trial. The complete response rate overall, and in the acute and delayed phases was 92.3%, 98.1%, and 92.3%, respectively. The complete protection rate overall and in the acute and delayed phases was 73.1%, 86.5%, and 73.1%, respectively. Grade 3-4 non-hematological toxicity did not occur. Antiemetic therapy with aprepitant, palonosetron, and dexamethasone is effective and safe in patients treated with oxaliplatin.


Assuntos
Antieméticos , Antineoplásicos , Antieméticos/uso terapêutico , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Aprepitanto , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Japão , Oxaliplatina/efeitos adversos , Palonossetrom , Quinuclidinas/efeitos adversos , Vômito/induzido quimicamente , Vômito/tratamento farmacológico , Vômito/prevenção & controle
10.
Am J Hematol ; 95(12): 1542-1552, 2020 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32871029

RESUMO

We conducted a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial to compare the efficacy and safety of high-dose dexamethasone (HD-DXM) plus recombinant human thrombopoietin (rhTPO), vs HD-DXM alone in newly diagnosed adult immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) patients. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned to receive DXM plus rhTPO or DXM monotherapy. Another 4-day course of DXM was repeated if response was not achieved by day 10 in both arms. One hundred patients in the HD-DXM plus rhTPO arm and 96 patients in the HD-DXM monotherapy arm were included in the full analysis set. So, HD-DXM plus rhTPO resulted in a higher incidence of initial response (89.0% vs 66.7%, P < .001) and complete response (CR, 75.0% vs 42.7%, P < .001) compared with HD-DXM monotherapy. Response rate at 6 months was also higher in the HD-DXM plus rhTPO arm than that in the HD-DXM monotherapy arm (51.0% vs 36.5%, P = .02; sustained CR: 46.0% vs 32.3%, P = .043). Throughout the follow-up period, the overall duration of response was greater in the HD-DXM plus rhTPO arm compared to the HD-DXM monotherapy arm (P = .04), as estimated by the Kaplan-Meier analysis. The study drugs were generally well tolerated. In conclusion, the combination of HD-DXM with rhTPO significantly improved the initial response and yielded favorable SR in newly diagnosed ITP patients, thus could be further validated as a frontline treatment for ITP. This study is registered as clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01734044.


Assuntos
Dexametasona/administração & dosagem , Púrpura Trombocitopênica Idiopática , Trombopoetina/administração & dosagem , Adulto , Idoso , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Quimioterapia Combinada , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Púrpura Trombocitopênica Idiopática/tratamento farmacológico , Púrpura Trombocitopênica Idiopática/mortalidade , Taxa de Sobrevida , Trombopoetina/efeitos adversos
11.
Cerebrovasc Dis ; 49(5): 495-502, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32932248

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is a frequent cerebrovascular disorder and still associated with high mortality and poor clinical outcomes. The purpose of this review was to update a 15-year-old former meta-analysis on randomized clinical trials (RCTs) addressing the question of whether ICH patients treated with dexamethasone have better outcomes than controls. METHODS: The electronic databases PubMed, SCOPUS, and Cochrane as well as web platforms on current clinical trials were searched for the years 1970-2020 without constriction on language. Data were extracted and outcomes were pooled for conventional and cumulative meta-analysis using a commercial software program (www.Meta-Analysis.com). RESULTS: Finally, 7 RCTs were identified and analyzed including 248 participants in the dexamethasone groups and 242 in the control groups. Five studies showed a high risk of bias. The overall relative risk (RR) for death was 1.32 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.99-1.76; p = 0.06) and did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. After exclusion of studies with high risk of bias, the RR for death was 1.37 (95% CI 0.54-3.42; p = 0.51). The RR for poor outcome did not differ significantly between the 2 groups analyzed for all included studies (RR = 0.69; 95% CI 0.47-1; p = 0.05) and after exclusion of studies with high risk of bias (RR = 0.7; 95% CI 0.45-1.08; p = 0.11). The RR for complications did not differ significantly including all studies (RR = 1.29; 95% CI 0.77-2.17; p = 0.34) and after exclusion of studies with high risk of bias (RR = 1.27; 95% CI 0.18-8.89; p = 0.81). The cumulative statistics delivered no other results; however, it pointed out fewer complications over time in the dexamethasone group. CONCLUSION: Clear evidence of a beneficial or negative effect of dexamethasone is still lacking. Modern RCTs or observational studies with propensity design are necessary to evaluate the efficacy and safety of treatment with dexamethasone in patients with ICH.


Assuntos
Hemorragia Cerebral/tratamento farmacológico , Dexametasona/uso terapêutico , Glucocorticoides/uso terapêutico , Idoso , Hemorragia Cerebral/diagnóstico , Hemorragia Cerebral/mortalidade , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Glucocorticoides/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Segurança do Paciente , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento
12.
Ann Hematol ; 99(11): 2589-2598, 2020 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32892275

RESUMO

The induction therapy containing ixazomib, an oral proteasome inhibitor, has shown favorable efficacy and safety in clinical trials, but its experience in real-life remains limited. In routine practice, few patients received ixazomib-based induction therapy due to reasons including (1) patients' preference on oral regimens, (2) concerns on adverse events (AEs) of other intravenous/subcutaneous regimens, (3) requirements for less center visits, and (4) fears of COVID-19 and other infectious disease exposures. With the aim of assessing the real-life effectiveness and safety of ixazomib-based induction therapy, we performed this multi-center, observational study on 85 newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients from 14 medical centers. Ixazomib-based regimens included ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (IRd) in 44.7% of patients, ixazomib-dexamethasone (Id) in 29.4%, and Id plus another agent (doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, or daratumumab) in 25.9%. Different ixazomib-based therapies were applied due to (1) financial burdens or limitations on local health insurance coverage, (2) concerns on treatment tolerance, and (3) drug accessibility issue. Ten patients received ixazomib maintenance. The median age was 67 years; 43.5% had ISS stage III disease; 48.2% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score ≥ 2; and 17.6% with high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities. Overall response rate for all 85 patients was 95.3%, including 65.9% very good partial response or better and 29.5% complete responses. The median time to response was 30 days. The response rate was similar across different ixazomib-based regimens. Median progression-free survival was not reached. Severe AEs (≥ grade 3) were reported in 29.4% of patients. No grade 3/4 peripheral neuropathy (PN) occurred. Patients received a median of 6 (range 1-20) cycles of ixazomib treatment; 56.6% remained on treatment at data cutoff; 15.3% discontinued treatment due to intolerable AEs. These results support that the ixazomib-based frontline therapy was highly effective with acceptable toxicity in routine practice and the ixazomib oral regimens could be good alternative options for NDMM patients.


Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administração & dosagem , Compostos de Boro/administração & dosagem , Glicina/análogos & derivados , Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico , Doenças do Sistema Nervoso Periférico/induzido quimicamente , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Anticorpos Monoclonais/administração & dosagem , Anticorpos Monoclonais/efeitos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Compostos de Boro/efeitos adversos , Ciclofosfamida/administração & dosagem , Ciclofosfamida/efeitos adversos , Dexametasona/administração & dosagem , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Doxorrubicina/administração & dosagem , Doxorrubicina/efeitos adversos , Esquema de Medicação , Feminino , Glicina/administração & dosagem , Glicina/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Lenalidomida/administração & dosagem , Lenalidomida/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Mieloma Múltiplo/mortalidade , Mieloma Múltiplo/patologia , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Doenças do Sistema Nervoso Periférico/diagnóstico , Doenças do Sistema Nervoso Periférico/fisiopatologia , Indução de Remissão , Análise de Sobrevida , Talidomida/administração & dosagem , Talidomida/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento
13.
JAMA ; 324(13): 1307-1316, 2020 10 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32876695

RESUMO

Importance: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with substantial mortality and use of health care resources. Dexamethasone use might attenuate lung injury in these patients. Objective: To determine whether intravenous dexamethasone increases the number of ventilator-free days among patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, randomized, open-label, clinical trial conducted in 41 intensive care units (ICUs) in Brazil. Patients with COVID-19 and moderate to severe ARDS, according to the Berlin definition, were enrolled from April 17 to June 23, 2020. Final follow-up was completed on July 21, 2020. The trial was stopped early following publication of a related study before reaching the planned sample size of 350 patients. Interventions: Twenty mg of dexamethasone intravenously daily for 5 days, 10 mg of dexamethasone daily for 5 days or until ICU discharge, plus standard care (n =151) or standard care alone (n = 148). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was ventilator-free days during the first 28 days, defined as being alive and free from mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality at 28 days, clinical status of patients at day 15 using a 6-point ordinal scale (ranging from 1, not hospitalized to 6, death), ICU-free days during the first 28 days, mechanical ventilation duration at 28 days, and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores (range, 0-24, with higher scores indicating greater organ dysfunction) at 48 hours, 72 hours, and 7 days. Results: A total of 299 patients (mean [SD] age, 61 [14] years; 37% women) were enrolled and all completed follow-up. Patients randomized to the dexamethasone group had a mean 6.6 ventilator-free days (95% CI, 5.0-8.2) during the first 28 days vs 4.0 ventilator-free days (95% CI, 2.9-5.4) in the standard care group (difference, 2.26; 95% CI, 0.2-4.38; P = .04). At 7 days, patients in the dexamethasone group had a mean SOFA score of 6.1 (95% CI, 5.5-6.7) vs 7.5 (95% CI, 6.9-8.1) in the standard care group (difference, -1.16; 95% CI, -1.94 to -0.38; P = .004). There was no significant difference in the prespecified secondary outcomes of all-cause mortality at 28 days, ICU-free days during the first 28 days, mechanical ventilation duration at 28 days, or the 6-point ordinal scale at 15 days. Thirty-three patients (21.9%) in the dexamethasone group vs 43 (29.1%) in the standard care group experienced secondary infections, 47 (31.1%) vs 42 (28.3%) needed insulin for glucose control, and 5 (3.3%) vs 9 (6.1%) experienced other serious adverse events. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with COVID-19 and moderate or severe ARDS, use of intravenous dexamethasone plus standard care compared with standard care alone resulted in a statistically significant increase in the number of ventilator-free days (days alive and free of mechanical ventilation) over 28 days. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04327401.


Assuntos
Anti-Inflamatórios/uso terapêutico , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Dexametasona/uso terapêutico , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Respiração Artificial/estatística & dados numéricos , /tratamento farmacológico , Administração Intravenosa , Idoso , Anti-Inflamatórios/efeitos adversos , Betacoronavirus , Brasil , Infecções Relacionadas a Cateter/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/complicações , Infecções por Coronavirus/mortalidade , Infecções por Coronavirus/terapia , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Término Precoce de Ensaios Clínicos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/complicações , Pneumonia Viral/mortalidade , Pneumonia Viral/terapia , /etiologia
14.
Ann Hematol ; 99(10): 2351-2356, 2020 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32865607

RESUMO

Lenalidomide (Len) and dexamethasone (dex) therapy is a standard therapy in patients with multiple myeloma. Elderly or unfit patients may reduce Len or dex doses to prevent toxicities that lead to treatment discontinuation. However, there have been few studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of lower doses of Len and dex. We conducted a phase II study of 1.5-year low-dose Len and dex therapy following melphalan and prednisolone (MP), the number of which cycles was determined by a response within 9 cycles. The Len dose was 10 mg daily and the dex dose was 20 mg weekly, which were continued for 1.5 years. Twenty-one patients were enrolled. The median number of cycles of MP was 3 (range, 2-9). The overall response rate was 81% and a very good partial response or better was achieved in 33.3% of patients. The median follow-up time for survivors was 70.5 months (range, 42-83 months), the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 27 months (95% CI, 21-33 months), and the median overall survival was not reached. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were observed in 28.6% of patients. In conclusion, the low-dose Len and dex therapy safely achieved comparable efficacies to the standard-dose regimen in elderly patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. UMIN000007889.


Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Anemia/induzido quimicamente , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Dexametasona/administração & dosagem , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Esquema de Medicação , Neutropenia Febril/induzido quimicamente , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Lenalidomida/administração & dosagem , Lenalidomida/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Melfalan/administração & dosagem , Melfalan/efeitos adversos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Mieloma Múltiplo/genética , Prednisolona/administração & dosagem , Prednisolona/efeitos adversos , Intervalo Livre de Progressão , Indução de Remissão , Resultado do Tratamento , Adulto Jovem
15.
Eur J Haematol ; 105(6): 751-754, 2020 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32745304

RESUMO

COVID-19 has emerged as a global pandemic. Cancer patients have been reported to be at higher risk for adverse outcome of COVID-19. Studies are ongoing to decipher the risk factors and risk groups among cancer patients as well as strategies to refine treatment approaches. Here, we report eight patients with multiple myeloma that underwent immunomodulatory therapies with daratumumab or lenalidomide-based combination treatments and one patient with smoldering multiple myeloma, all of which presented with symptomatic COVID-19. We report that patients that succumbed to COVID-19 presented with either progressive tumor disease under daratumumab treatment or were in remission under lenalidomide-dexamethasone treatment.


Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais/efeitos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Infecções por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Lenalidomida/efeitos adversos , Mieloma Múltiplo/diagnóstico , Pneumonia Viral/diagnóstico , Talidomida/efeitos adversos , Anticorpos Monoclonais/administração & dosagem , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administração & dosagem , Betacoronavirus/patogenicidade , Estudos de Coortes , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções por Coronavirus/imunologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/mortalidade , Dexametasona/administração & dosagem , Progressão da Doença , Feminino , Humanos , Imunomodulação , Lenalidomida/administração & dosagem , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico , Mieloma Múltiplo/imunologia , Mieloma Múltiplo/mortalidade , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Pneumonia Viral/imunologia , Pneumonia Viral/mortalidade , Prognóstico , Indução de Remissão , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Análise de Sobrevida , Talidomida/administração & dosagem , Resultado do Tratamento
16.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 99(34): e21671, 2020 Aug 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32846782

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Concerns exist regarding the analgesia effect and safety of multiple versus single doses dexamethasone in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. There is an urgent need of studies that efficiently control for confounding, conduct comprehensive and consecutive observation of potential risks of the dexamethasone administration, and investigate its clinical applicability. We thus further designed a randomized controlled study to assess the different dose of dexamethasone on postoperative pain and complications in patients undergoing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. METHODS: This randomized, prospective, controlled study was carried out between January 2018 and August 2019. It was approved by the institutional review board in our hospital (HBRM2020013). A total of 80 patients were randomly assigned to each group: the study group (n = 40) and the control group (n = 40). All surgical procedures were performed by a similar orthopedic surgeon. In the study group, patients received intravenously 20 mg dexamethasone (4 mL, Tianjin Kingyork group Co., Ltd., China) just after the anesthesia, and repeated at 24 hours after the surgery. Patients in the control group received intravenously 10 mg dexamethasone solution (2 mL) just after the anesthesia, and repeated at 24 hours after the surgery. CRP, IL-6, VAS pain scores at rest and walking, the VAS scores of nausea, and the incidence of postoperative vomiting and nausea (POVN) were recorded at 24, 48, and 72 hours postoperatively. CONCLUSION: We hypothesized that patients receiving multiple doses of dexamethasone was associated with better outcomes compared with patients receiving single dose of dexamethasone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study protocol was registered in Research Registry (researchregistry5770).


Assuntos
Artroplastia do Joelho , Dexametasona/administração & dosagem , Glucocorticoides/administração & dosagem , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Náusea e Vômito Pós-Operatórios/dietoterapia , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto/métodos , Artroplastia do Joelho/métodos , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Glucocorticoides/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Estudos Prospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento
17.
Am J Hematol ; 95(12): 1486-1494, 2020 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32804408

RESUMO

Daratumumab in combination with lenalidomide-dexamethasone (D-Rd) recently received FDA approval for the treatment of transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). The present PEGASUS study compared progression-free survival (PFS) in patients treated with D-Rd in the MAIA trial and patients treated with common standard-of-care regimens from the Flatiron Health electronic health record-derived deidentified database, which has data from patients treated primarily at community-based oncology practices in the United States. Individual-level patient data from both data sources were used to perform an anchored indirect treatment comparison (ITC) of D-Rd to bortezomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (VRd) and bortezomib-dexamethasone (Vd); lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Rd) was the common anchor for the ITC. Hazard ratios (HRs) reflecting direct comparisons of PFS within MAIA (D-Rd vs Rd) and Flatiron Health (VRd vs Rd; Vd vs Rd) were used to make ITCs for D-Rd vs VRd and Vd, respectively. After application of MAIA inclusion/exclusion criteria and propensity-score weighting, the Flatiron Health patients resembled the MAIA trial population on measured baseline characteristics. Based on the direct comparison within MAIA, treatment with D-Rd was associated with a significantly lower risk of progression or death compared to Rd (HR 0.54; 95% CI 0.42, 0.71). Based on the ITCs, D-Rd was associated with a significantly lower risk of progression or death compared to VRd (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.48, 0.98) and Vd (HR 0.48; 95% CI 0.33, 0.69). In the absence of head-to-head trials comparing D-Rd to VRd or Vd, the present ITC may help inform treatment selection in transplant-ineligible patients with NDMM.


Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administração & dosagem , Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico , Mieloma Múltiplo/mortalidade , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Anticorpos Monoclonais/administração & dosagem , Anticorpos Monoclonais/efeitos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Dexametasona/administração & dosagem , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Feminino , Humanos , Lenalidomida/administração & dosagem , Lenalidomida/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Taxa de Sobrevida
18.
Trials ; 21(1): 717, 2020 Aug 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32799933

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: There are no specific generally accepted therapies for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The full spectrum of COVID-19 ranges from asymptomatic disease to mild respiratory tract illness to severe pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), multisystem organ failure, and death. The efficacy of corticosteroids in viral ARDS remains unknown. We postulated that adjunctive treatment of established ARDS caused by COVID-19 with intravenous dexamethasone might change the pulmonary and systemic inflammatory response and thereby reduce morbidity, leading to a decrease in duration of mechanical ventilation and in mortality. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a multicenter, randomized, controlled, parallel, open-label, superiority trial testing dexamethasone in 200 mechanically ventilated adult patients with established moderate-to-severe ARDS caused by confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Established ARDS is defined as maintaining a PaO2/FiO2 ≤ 200 mmHg on PEEP ≥ 10 cmH2O and FiO2 ≥ 0.5 after 12 ± 3 h of routine intensive care. Eligible patients will be randomly assigned to receive either dexamethasone plus standard intensive care or standard intensive care alone. Patients in the dexamethasone group will receive an intravenous dose of 20 mg once daily from day 1 to day 5, followed by 10 mg once daily from day 6 to day 10. The primary outcome is 60-day mortality. The secondary outcome is the number of ventilator-free days, defined as days alive and free from mechanical ventilation at day 28 after randomization. All analyses will be done according to the intention-to-treat principle. DISCUSSION: This study will assess the role of dexamethasone in patients with established moderate-to-severe ARDS caused by SARS-CoV-2. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04325061 . Registered on 25 March 2020 as DEXA-COVID19.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Dexametasona/uso terapêutico , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Adulto , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Pandemias , Tamanho da Amostra
19.
PLoS One ; 15(8): e0237080, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32764779

RESUMO

We previously demonstrated corticosteroid administration on the neonatal intensive care unit was associated with reduced lung function at 11 to 14 years of age in children born very prematurely. The objective of this observational study was to assess if lung function remained impaired at 16 to 19 years of age in those who had received postnatal corticosteroids and whether the trajectory of lung function with increasing age differed between those who had and had not received corticosteroids. One hundred and fifty-nine children born prior to 29 weeks of gestational age had comprehensive lung function measurements; 49 had received postnatal dexamethasone. Lung function outcomes were compared between those who had and had not received postnatal dexamethasone after adjustment for neonatal factors. Forced expiratory flow at 75%, 50%, 25% and 25-75% of the expired vital capacity, forced expiratory volume in one second, peak expiratory flow and forced vital capacity and lung volumes (total lung capacity and residual volume) were assessed. The majority of results were significantly lower in those who received dexamethasone (between 0.61 to 0.78 standard deviations). Lung function reduced as the number of courses of dexamethasone increased. Between 11 and 14 years and 16 to 19 years, lung function improved in the unexposed group, but forced expiratory flow at 75% of the expired vital capacity and forced expiratory volume in one second deteriorated in those who had received postnatal corticosteroids (p = 0.0006). These results suggest that prematurely born young people who received postnatal corticosteroids may be at risk of premature onset of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.


Assuntos
Displasia Broncopulmonar/prevenção & controle , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Lactente Extremamente Prematuro/fisiologia , Nascimento Prematuro/tratamento farmacológico , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/epidemiologia , Adolescente , Displasia Broncopulmonar/etiologia , Criança , Dexametasona/administração & dosagem , Feminino , Seguimentos , Volume Expiratório Forçado/efeitos dos fármacos , Volume Expiratório Forçado/fisiologia , Humanos , Recém-Nascido , Masculino , Nascimento Prematuro/fisiopatologia , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/diagnóstico , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/fisiopatologia , Fatores de Risco , Reino Unido/epidemiologia , Capacidade Vital/efeitos dos fármacos , Capacidade Vital/fisiologia
20.
Respir Physiol Neurobiol ; 280: 103492, 2020 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32659271

RESUMO

In December 2019, an outbreak of severe pneumonia was reported in Wuhan, China. Later described as COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019), this infection caused by a virus from the Coronaviridae family (SARS-CoV-2) has spread globally. Effective therapies for this new disease are urgently needed. In this short communication, we will evaluate the use of corticosteroids as an adjunctive pharmacological therapy in the management of COVID-19 and describe its pros and cons in light of the latest available evidence.


Assuntos
Anti-Inflamatórios/administração & dosagem , Betacoronavirus/efeitos dos fármacos , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Citocinas/antagonistas & inibidores , Glucocorticoides/administração & dosagem , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Corticosteroides/administração & dosagem , Corticosteroides/efeitos adversos , Anti-Inflamatórios/efeitos adversos , Betacoronavirus/fisiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/sangue , Infecções por Coronavirus/fisiopatologia , Citocinas/sangue , Dexametasona/administração & dosagem , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Esquema de Medicação , Glucocorticoides/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/sangue , Pneumonia Viral/fisiopatologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA