RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: The impact of diabetes mellitus (DM) on colorectal cancer (CRC) outcomes remains unknown. We studied this by conducting a meta-analysis to evaluate (1) CRC outcomes with and without DM and (2) treatment patterns. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and CINAHL for full-text English studies from 1970 to 12/31/2017. We searched keywords, subject headings, and MESH terms to locate studies of CRC outcomes/treatment and DM. Studies were evaluated by two oncologists. Of 14,332, 48 met inclusion criteria. In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses method, we extracted study location, design, DM definition, covariates, comparison groups, outcomes, and relative risks and/or hazard ratios. We utilized a random-effects model to pool adjusted risk estimates. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality (ACM), disease-free survival (DFS), relapse-free survival (RFS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS). The secondary outcome was treatment patterns. RESULTS: Forty-eight studies were included, 42 in the meta-analysis, and 6 in the descriptive analysis, totaling > 240,000 patients. ACM was 21% worse (OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.15-1.28) and DFS was 75% worse (OR 1.75, 95% CI: 1.33-2.31) in patients with DM. No differences were detected in CSS (OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.98-1.23) or RFS (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.91-1.38). Descriptive analysis of treatment patterns in CRC and DM suggested potentially less adjuvant therapy use in cases with DM and CRC. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis suggests that patients with CRC and DM have worse ACM and DFS than patients without DM, suggesting that non-cancer causes of death in may account for worse outcomes.
Assuntos
Neoplasias Colorretais , Diabetes Mellitus , Neoplasias Colorretais/terapia , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiologia , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Humanos , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia , Modelos de Riscos ProporcionaisRESUMO
Background: Recipients of high-dose vs standard-dose influenza vaccines have fewer influenza illnesses. We evaluated the comparative effectiveness of high-dose vaccine in preventing postinfluenza deaths during 2012-2013 and 2013-2014, when influenza viruses and vaccines were similar. Methods: We identified Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years who received high-dose or standard-dose vaccines in community-located pharmacies offering both vaccines. The primary outcome was death in the 30 days following an inpatient or emergency department encounter listing an influenza International of Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification code. Effectiveness was estimated by using multivariate Poisson regression models; effectiveness was allowed to vary by season. Results: We studied 1039645 recipients of high-dose and 1683264 recipients of standard-dose vaccines during 2012-2013, and 1508176 high-dose and 1877327 standard-dose recipients during 2013-2014. Vaccinees were well-balanced for medical conditions and indicators of frail health. Rates of postinfluenza death were 0.028 and 0.038/10000 person-weeks in high-dose and standard-dose recipients, respectively. Comparative effectiveness was 24.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], .6%-42%); there was evidence of variation by season (P = .12). In 2012-2013, high-dose was 36.4% (95% CI, 9.0%-56%) more effective in reducing mortality; in 2013-2014, it was 2.5% (95% CI, -47% to 35%). Conclusions: High-dose vaccine was significantly more effective in preventing postinfluenza deaths in 2012-2013, when A(H3N2) circulation was common, but not in 2013-2014.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra Influenza/administração & dosagem , Influenza Humana/mortalidade , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Relação Dose-Resposta Imunológica , Feminino , Humanos , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H3N2 , Vacinas contra Influenza/uso terapêutico , Masculino , Medicare , Fatores de Risco , Estações do Ano , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados UnidosRESUMO
BACKGROUND Patients receiving immunosuppressive therapies might be more susceptible to COVID-19. Conversely, an exaggerated inflammatory response to the SARS-CoV-2 infection might be blunted by certain forms of immunosuppression, which could be protective. Indeed, there are data from animal models demonstrating that complement may be a part of the pathophysiology of coronavirus infections. There is also evidence from an autopsy series demonstrating complement deposition in the lungs of patients with COVID-19. This raises the question of whether patients on anti-complement therapy could be protected from COVID-19. CASE REPORT Case 1 is a 39-year-old woman with an approximately 20-year history of paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH), who had recently been switched from treatment with eculizumab to ravulizumab prior to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Case 2 is a 54-year-old woman with a cadaveric renal transplant for lupus nephritis, complicated by thrombotic microangiopathy, who was maintained on eculizumab, which she started several months before she developed the SARS-CoV-2 infection. Case 3 is a 60-year-old woman with a 14-year history of PNH, who had been treated with eculizumab since 2012, and was diagnosed with COVID-19 at the time of her scheduled infusion. All 3 patients had a relatively mild course of COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS We see no evidence of increased susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 in these patients on anti-complement therapy, which might actually have accounted for the mild course of infection. The effect of anti-complement therapy on COVID-19 disease needs to be determined in clinical trials.
Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/uso terapêutico , Complemento C5/metabolismo , Infecções por Coronavirus/complicações , Hemoglobinúria Paroxística/tratamento farmacológico , Pneumonia Viral/complicações , Microangiopatias Trombóticas/tratamento farmacológico , Adulto , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Complemento C5/efeitos dos fármacos , Complemento C5/imunologia , Inativadores do Complemento/uso terapêutico , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Feminino , Hemoglobinúria Paroxística/complicações , Hemoglobinúria Paroxística/imunologia , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , SARS-CoV-2 , Microangiopatias Trombóticas/complicações , Microangiopatias Trombóticas/imunologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND/AIM: National guidelines offer little guidance on the use of PSA progression (PSA increase as defined below) as a clinical endpoint in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The aim of the study was to examine treatment patterns/outcomes with abiraterone (abi)/enzalutamide (enza) throughout PSA progression and near the end of life (EOL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cases of mCRPC treated with abi or enza from the New York Veterans Affairs (VA) from 6/2011-8/2017 were reviewed. Regression analyses were conducted to identify factors associated with continuation of abi/enza treatment up to the EOL, and survival. RESULTS: Of 184 patients, 72 received abi alone, 28 received enza alone, and 84 received both. Treatment was changed for PSA progression alone in 39.1% (abi) and 25.7% (enza) of patients. A total of 37 patients (20%) received abi/enza within 1 month before death, 30% of whom were receiving hospice services. Older patients and black patients were less likely to receive abi/enza up to the EOL. CONCLUSION: Abi/enza are frequently discontinued for PSA progression alone and continued at EOL. The clinical benefit of these practices warrants additional study.