The evidence base for emergency use authorizations for COVID-19 treatments: A rapid review.

Background and Aims: During the COVID-19 pandemic, US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) permitted emergency use authorizations (EUAs) for vaccines/treatments with promising data. Eight treatments were issued EUAs by May 31, 2021; one of these was approved (Remdesivir for certain populations) and two were revoked (chloroquine phosphate/hydroxychloroquine and bamlanivimab) by September 30, 2021. The aim of this study is to find out what evidence the EUAs were based on and how many studies were published while they remained active (up to September 30, 2021). Methods: A review of published clinical studies for the 6 months before each EUA was issued, and the time after (until September 30, 2021, or until revoked). PubMed and the identified systematic reviews were the sources for identifying published literature. Results: The number of clinical studies published pre-EUA varied from a single case study (for chloroquine phosphate/hydroxychloroquine) to numerous studies of multiple types (for convalescent plasma). Four treatments had a single randomized controlled trial (RCT) as evidence (bamlanivimab monotherapy, REGN-COV, bamlanivimab + etesevimab, sotrovimab) and two also had other study types (remdesivir and baricitinib). The number of clinical studies published post-EUA (for those active on September 30, 2021) was widely varied. Eighteen RCTs were published for Convalescent plasma, while Remdesivir had eight. Baricitinib, REGN-COV, and bamlanivimab + etesevimab all had one, but none were published for sotrovimab. Conclusion: The number of trials for treatments with EUAs was limited in all cases before the EUA was issued, and in most cases for those with EUAs ongoing at the end of September 2021. The presence of EUAs may discourage participation in relevant clinical trials, which delays the widespread implementation of evidenced-based therapies. Large, robust RCTs should be completed, such as the RECOVERY trial in the United Kingdom, to quickly find the answers desperately required during a pandemic.

Impact of Rabeprazole on APO-Dabigatran Exposure in Healthy Volunteers.

Background: Dabigatran is effective and safe for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation and for venous thromboembolism prevention and treatment. In Canada, APO-dabigatran, a generic formulation, has been approved based on a bioequivalence study, but its bioavailability in settings of reduced gastric acidity has not been examined. Methods: Treatment With APO-Dabigatran Absorption (TADA) was an open-label crossover study in 46 healthy male volunteers, comparing the absorption of APO-dabigatran (150 mg) with vs without rabeprazole. The primary outcome was the 24-hour total dabigatran exposure as measured by area under the curve (AUC) and peak concentration (Cmax). Results: Compared with no rabeprazole pretreatment, the total dabigatran AUC (geometric mean [gmean] AUC0-tz: 567.2 vs 804 ngh/mL, and gmean AUC0-∞: 609.7 vs 804) and Cmax (gmean: 64.1 vs 104.4 ng/mL) were significantly reduced with rabeprazole. The percent gmean ratios for AUC0-tz, AUC0-∞, and Cmax (with rabeprazole vs without) were 70.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 51.9% to 95.7%), 71.8% (95% CI: 53.1% to 96.9%), and 61.4% (95% CI: 44.1% to 85.5%), respectively. With rabeprazole, the proportions of participants with > 50% reduction in AUC0-tz, AUC0-∞, and Cmax were 32.6%, 30.4%, and 39.1%, respectively. Conclusions: When APO-dabigatran is administered with rabeprazole, the exposure to dabigatran is reduced by about 30%, which is similar to the level observed with Pradaxa when it was co-administered with a proton pump inhibitor. However, the finding that one-third of participants had a > 50% reduction in exposure is concerning, and it highlights the need for caution in patients who have, or are at risk of, reduced gastric acidity.

Contexte: Le dabigatran est une option thérapeutique sûre et efficace pour prévenir les accidents vasculaires cérébraux chez les patients atteints de fibrillation auriculaire et pour prévenir et traiter les thromboembolies veineuses. Au Canada, APO-dabigatran (une version générique) a été homologué sur la base d'une étude de bioéquivalence, mais sa biodisponibilité en contexte d'acidité gastrique réduite n'a pas été évaluée. Méthodologie: L'étude TADA ( T reatment with A PO- D abigatran A bsorption) est une étude croisée menée en mode ouvert auprès de 46 hommes volontaires en bonne santé, afin de comparer l'absorption d'APO-dabigatran (à 150 mg) avec et sans rabéprazole. Le critère d'évaluation principal était l'exposition totale sur 24 heures au dabigatran, telle que mesurée par la surface sous la courbe (SSC) et la concentration maximale (Cmax). Résultats: Par rapport à une administration sans prétraitement par rabéprazole, une réduction significative de la SSC totale du dabigatran (moyenne géométrique [MG] SSC0-tz : 567,2 par rapport à 804 ngh/ml; MG SSC0-∞ : 609,7 par rapport à 804 ngh/ml) et de la Cmax (MG : 64,1 par rapport à 104,4 ng/ml) a été observée avec la prise de rabéprazole. Les ratios des MG en pourcentage de la SSC0-tz, de la SSC0-∞, et de la Cmax (avec et sans rabéprazole) étaient de 70,5 % (intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 % : 51,9 % à 95,7 %), 71,8 % (IC à 95 % : 53,1 % à 96,9 %) et 61,4 % (IC à 95 % : 44,1 % à 85,5 %), respectivement. Les proportions de participants chez qui une réduction de > 50 % de la SSC0-tz, de la SSC0-∞ ou de la Cmax a été notée avec l'administration du rabéprazole s'élevaient à 32,6 %, 30,4 % et 39,1 %, respectivement. Conclusions: Lors de l'administration d'APO-dabigatran en concomitance avec le rabéprazole, l'exposition au dabigatran était réduite d'environ 30 %, une valeur comparable à la réduction observée lors de l'administration de Pradaxa en concomitance avec un inhibiteur de la pompe à protons. La réduction de > 50 % de l'exposition médicamenteuse chez le tiers des participants n'en est pas moins préoccupante et démontre la nécessité de faire preuve de prudence lorsque l'acidité gastrique est réduite ou risque d'être réduite chez un patient.

Obese patients' characteristics and weight loss outcomes in cardiac rehabilitation: An observational study of registry data.

AIM: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) guidelines advocate weight loss for obese patients but mean weight loss is small. We sought to determine the extent to which obese patients' characteristics prior to CR predict weight loss. METHODS: An observational, pre- and post CR study of routine practice using the UK National Audit of Cardiac Rehabilitation dataset was undertaken. Backward, stepwise, multiple linear regression analysis was used to identify characteristics prior to CR that predicted weight change in obese patients. RESULTS: In 29,601 obese patients undertaking CR, mean weight loss was 0.9 kg (SD 4.3; p < 0.001) in men (74% of sample) and 0.5 kg (SD 3.9; p < 0.001) in women. Smoking cessation since the cardiac event independently predicted less weight loss by 1.2 kg (95% CI; 0.9, 1.5 kg; p < 0.001). Diabetes, cardiac surgery, living in a deprived area, being female, low fitness levels and pain independently predicted less weight loss during CR. Higher initial weight, greater age and being employed predicted increased weight loss. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to identify how the characteristics of obese patients independently predict different amounts of weight loss during CR in free-living individuals. It is also the largest, registry-based study to investigate predictors of weight loss in obese patients in CR. Knowledge of the extent to which obese patients' characteristics predict more or less weight loss can aid: the generation of guidelines; agreement of realistic goals with patients; and tailoring of weight management support.

Negative pressure wound therapy versus usual care for surgical wounds healing by secondary intention (SWHSI-2 trial): study protocol for a pragmatic, multicentre, cross surgical specialty, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The majority of surgical wounds are closed (for example with sutures or staples) and so heal by primary intention. Where closure is not possible, or the wound subsequently breaks down, wounds may be left to heal from the bottom up (healing by secondary intention). Surgical wound healing by secondary intention (SWHSI) frequently presents a significant management challenge. Additional treatments are often required during the course of healing, and thus a significant financial burden is associated with treating these wounds. Increasingly, negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is used in the management of SWHSI. This wound dressing system provides a negative pressure (vacuum) to the wound, removing fluid into a canister, which is believed to be conducive to wound healing. Despite the increasing use of NPWT, there is limited robust evidence for the effectiveness of this device. A well-designed and conducted randomised controlled trial is now required to ascertain if NPWT is a clinically and cost-effective treatment for SWHSI. METHODS: SWHSI-2 is a pragmatic, multi-centre, cross surgical specialty, two arm, parallel group, randomised controlled superiority trial. Adult patients with a SWHSI will be randomised to receive either NPWT or usual care (no NPWT) and will be followed up for 12 months. The primary outcome will be time to healing (defined as full epithelial cover in absence of a scab) in number of days since randomisation. Secondary outcomes will include key clinical events (hospital admission or discharge, treatment status, reoperation, amputation, antibiotic use and death), wound infection, wound pain, health-related quality of life, health utility and resource use. DISCUSSION: Given the increasing use of NPWT, despite limited high-quality supporting evidence, the SWHSI-2 Trial will provide robust evidence on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of NPWT in the management of SWHSI. The SWHSI-2 Trial opened to recruitment in May 2019 and is currently recruiting across 20 participating centres. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 26277546 . Prospectively registered on 25 March 2019.