Explore the vast range of titles available.

Chagas disease (CD) continues to be a neglected infectious disease with one of the largest burdens globally. Despite the modest cure rates in adult chronic patients and its safety profile, benznidazole (BNZ) is still the drug of choice. Its current recommended dose is based on nonrandomized studies, and efficacy and safety of the optimal dose of BNZ have been scarcely analyzed in clinical trials. MULTIBENZ is a phase II, randomized, noninferiority, double-blind, multicenter international clinical trial. A total of 240 patients with Trypanosoma CD in the chronic phase will be recruited in four different countries (Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Spain). Patients will be randomized to receive BNZ 150 mg/day for 60 days, 400 mg/day for 15 days, or 300 mg/day for 60 days (comparator arm). The primary outcome is the efficacy of three different BNZ therapeutic schemes in terms of dose and duration. Efficacy will be assessed according to the proportion of patients with sustained parasitic load suppression in peripheral blood measured by polymerase chain reaction. The secondary outcomes are related to pharmacokinetics and drug tolerability. The follow-up will be 12 months from randomization to end of study participation. Recruitment was started in April 2018. This is a clinical trial conducted for the assessment of different dose schemes of BNZ compared with the standard treatment regimen for the treatment of CD in the chronic phase. MULTIBENZ may help to clarify which is the most adequate BNZ regimen in terms of efficacy and safety, predicated on sustained parasitic load suppression in peripheral blood. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03191162. Registered on 19 June 2017.

Background Chagas disease (CD) continues to be a neglected infectious disease with one of the largest burdens globally. Despite the modest cure rates in adult chronic patients and its safety profile, benznidazole (BNZ) is still the drug of choice. Its current recommended dose is based on nonrandomized studies, and efficacy and safety of the optimal dose of BNZ have been scarcely analyzed in clinical trials. Methods/design MULTIBENZ is a phase II, randomized, superiority, double-blind, multicenter international clinical trial. A total of 240 patients with Trypanosoma CD in the chronic phase will be recruited in four different countries (Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Spain). Patients will be randomized to receive BNZ 150 mg/day for 60 days, 400 mg/day for 15 days, or 300 mg/day for 60 days (comparator arm). The primary outcome is the efficacy of three different BNZ therapeutic schemes in terms of dose and duration. Efficacy will be assessed according to the proportion of patients with sustained parasitic load suppression in peripheral blood measured by polymerase chain reaction. The secondary outcomes are related to pharmacokinetics and drug tolerability. The follow-up will be 12 months from randomization to end of study participation. Recruitment was started in April 2018. Conclusion This is a clinical trial conducted for the assessment of different dose schemes of BNZ compared with the standard treatment regimen for the treatment of CD in the chronic phase. MULTIBENZ may help to clarify which is the most adequate BNZ regimen in terms of efficacy and safety, predicated on sustained parasitic load suppression in peripheral blood. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03191162 . Registered on 19 June 2017.

Treatment with benznidazole for chronic Chagas disease is associated with low cure rates and substantial toxicity. We aimed to compare the parasitological efficacy and safety of 3 different benznidazole regimens in adult patients with chronic Chagas disease. The MULTIBENZ trial was an international, randomised, double-blind, phase 2b trial performed in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Spain. We included participants aged 18 years and older diagnosed with Chagas disease with two different serological tests and detectable T cruzi DNA by qPCR in blood. Previously treated people, pregnant women, and people with severe cardiac forms were excluded. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1:1, using a balanced block randomisation scheme stratified by country, to receive benznidazole at three different doses: 300 mg/day for 60 days (control group), 150 mg/day for 60 days (low dose group), or 400 mg/day for 15 days (short treatment group). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a sustained parasitological negativity by qPCR during a follow-up period of 12 months. The primary safety outcome was the proportion of people who permanently discontinued the treatment. Both primary efficacy analysis and primary safety analysis were done in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with EudraCT, 2016-003789-21, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03191162, and is completed. From April 20, 2017, to Sept 20, 2020, 245 people were enrolled, and 234 were randomly assigned: 78 to the control group, 77 to the low dose group, and 79 to the short treatment group. Sustained parasitological negativity was observed in 42 (54%) of 78 participants in the control group, 47 (61%) of 77 in the low dose group, and 46 (58%) of 79 in the short treatment group. Odds ratios were 1·41 (95% CI 0·69–2·88; p=0·34) when comparing the low dose and control groups and 1·23 (0·61–2·50; p=0·55) when comparing short treatment and control groups. 177 participants (76%) had an adverse event: 62 (79%) in the control group, 56 (73%) in the low dose group, and 59 (77%) in the short treatment group. However, discontinuations were less frequent in the short treatment group compared with the control group (2 [2%] vs 11 [14%]; OR 0·20, 95% CI 0·04–0·95; p=0·044). Participants had a similar parasitological responses. However, reducing the usual treatment from 8 weeks to 2 weeks might maintain the same response while facilitating adherence and increasing treatment coverage. These findings should be confirmed in a phase 3 clinical trial. European Community's 7th Framework Programme.

Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) has changed our lives. The scientific community has been investigating re-purposed treatments to prevent disease progression in coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients. Objective To determine whether ivermectin treatment can prevent hospitalization in individuals with early COVID-19. Design, setting and participants: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted in non-hospitalized individuals with COVID-19 in Corrientes, Argentina. Patients with SARS-CoV-2 positive nasal swabs were contacted within 48 h by telephone to invite them to participate. The trial randomized 501 patients between August 19th 2020 and February 22nd 2021. Intervention Patients were randomized to ivermectin ( N  = 250) or placebo ( N  = 251) arms in a staggered dose, according to the patient’s weight, for 2 days. Main outcomes and measures The efficacy of ivermectin to prevent hospitalizations was evaluated as primary outcome. We evaluated secondary outcomes in relationship to safety and other efficacy end points. Results The mean age was 42 years (SD ± 15.5) and the median time since symptom onset to the inclusion was 4 days [interquartile range 3–6]. The primary outcome of hospitalization was met in 14/250 (5.6%) individuals in ivermectin group and 21/251 (8.4%) in placebo group (odds ratio 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.32–1.31; p  = 0.227). Time to hospitalization was not statistically different between groups. The mean time from study enrollment to invasive mechanical ventilatory support (MVS) was 5.25 days (SD ± 1.71) in ivermectin group and 10 days (SD ± 2) in placebo group, ( p  = 0.019). There were no statistically significant differences in the other secondary outcomes including polymerase chain reaction test negativity and safety outcomes. Limitations Low percentage of hospitalization events, dose of ivermectin and not including only high-risk population. Conclusion Ivermectin had no significant effect on preventing hospitalization of patients with COVID-19. Patients who received ivermectin required invasive MVS earlier in their treatment. No significant differences were observed in any of the other secondary outcomes. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04529525 .

Objectives To assess the efficacy of ivermectin in addition to standard treatment compared to standard treatment alone in reducing hospitalizations in the COVID-19 patient population. Trial design IVERCOR-COVID19 will be a single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind, parallel group (1:1 ratio), placebo-controlled study. Participants Patients who meet the following criteria will be invited to participate: Inclusion criteria: (1) Over 18 years of age who reside in the province of Corrientes at the time of diagnosis. (2) Confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test for detection of SARS-CoV2 in the last 48 h. (3) In the case of women of childbearing age, they must be using a contraceptive method of proven efficacy and safety (barrier, hormonal, or permanent contraceptives) for at least 3 months prior to inclusion in the present study and for the entire period of time for the duration of the study and until at least 30 days after the end of this study. A woman will be considered to have no reproductive capacity if she is postmenopausal (at least 2 years without her menstrual cycles) or if she has undergone surgical sterilization (at least 1 month before the time of inviting her to participate in this study). (4) Weight at the time of inclusion greater than 48 kg. (5) That they sign the informed consent for participation in the study. Exclusion criteria: (1) pregnant or breastfeeding women; (2) known allergy to ivermectin or some of the components of ivermectin tablets or placebo; (3) current use of home oxygen; (4) require hospitalization due to COVID-19 at the time of diagnosis or history of hospitalization for COVID-19; (5) presence of mal-absorptive syndrome; (6) presence of any other concomitant acute infectious disease; (7) known history of severe liver disease, for example liver cirrhosis; (8) need or use of antiviral drugs at the time of admission for another viral pathology other than COVID-19; (9) need or use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine; (10) use of ivermectin up to 7 days prior to randomization; (11) patients on dialysis or who have required it in the last 2 months or who plan to do it in the next 2 months; and (12) current participation or in the last 30 days in a research study that has included the administration of a drug (Table  1 ). Table 1 Ivermectin/placebo dose according to patient weight Patient weight Ivermectin/placebo dose Total dose (mg) Equal to or greater than 48 kg and less than 80 kg 2 tablets of 6 mg each at the time of inclusion and 2 tablets 24 h after the first intake 24 Equal or greater than 80 kg and less than 110 kg 3 tablets of 6 mg each at the time of inclusion and 3 tablets 24 h after the first intake 36 Equal or greater than 110 kg 4 tablets of 6 mg each at the time of inclusion and 4 tablets 24 h after the first intake 48 The study will be carried out by the Ministry of Public Health of the Province of Corrientes (Argentina) in coordination with the Institute of Cardiology of Corrientes in the Province of Corrientes, Argentina. Intervention and comparator Intervention group: patients who are randomized to ivermectin will receive the dose according to their weight (patients up to 80 kg will receive 2 tablets of 6 mg ivermectin; patients with more than 80 kg and up to 110 kg will receive 3 tablets of 6 mg of ivermectin; patients weighing more than 110 kg will receive 4 tablets of 6 mg ivermectin) the day they enter the study and the same dose 24 h after the first dose. Control group: patients who are randomized to placebo will receive the dose according to their weight (patients up to 80 kg will receive 2 tablets of 6 mg placebo; patients with more than 80 kg and up to 110 kg will receive 3 tablets of 6 mg of placebo; patients weighing more than 110 kg will receive 4 tablets of 6 mg placebo) on the day they enter the study and the same dose 24 h after the first dose (Table 2 ). Table 2 Inclusion and exclusion criteria Inclusion criteria Exclusion criteria 1. Over 18 years of age who reside in the province of Corrientes at the time of diagnosis 1. Pregnant or breastfeeding women 2.Confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 by polymerase chain reaction test for detection of SARS-CoV2 in the last 48 h 2. Known allergy to ivermectin or some of the components of ivermectin tablets or placebo 3. In case of being women of childbearing age, they must be using a contraceptive method of proven efficacy and safety (barrier, hormonal, or permanent contraceptives) for at least 3 months prior to inclusion in the present study, during the entire period of time for the duration of the study, and until at least 30 days after the end of this study. A woman will be considered to have no reproductive capacity if she is postmenopausal (at least 2 years without her menstrual cycles) or if she has undergone surgical sterilization (at least 1 month before the time of inviting her to participate in this study) 3. Current use of home oxygen 4. Weight at the time of inclusion equal to or greater than 48 kg 4. That require hospitalization due to COVID-19 at the time of diagnosis or history of hospitalization for COVID-19 5. That they sign the informed consent for participation in the study 5. Presence of mal-absorptive syndrome 6. Presence of any other concomitant acute infectious disease 7. Known history of severe liver disease, for example liver cirrhosis 8. Need or use of antiviral drugs at the time of admission for another viral pathology other than COVID-19 9. Need or use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine 10. Use of ivermectin up to 7 days prior to randomization 11. Patients on dialysis or who have required it in the last 2 months or who plan to do it in the next 2 months 12. Current participation or in the last 30 days in a research study that has included the administration of a drug Main outcomes Primary outcome will be the percentage of hospitalizations in patients with COVID-19 in the intervention and control groups. Secondary outcomes: time to hospitalization in each of the arms of the study: number of days elapsed from the inclusion in the study until the hospitalization of the patient; percentage of use of invasive mechanical ventilation in each of the study arms: every patient who is connected to invasive mechanical ventilation after signing the informed consent and before the final study visit; time to invasive mechanical ventilation in each of the arms of the study: number of days elapsed from inclusion in the study to connection to invasive mechanical ventilation of the patient; percentage of patients requiring dialysis in each of the study arms: all patients who require renal replacement therapy of any kind, temporary or permanent, and which begins after signing the informed consent and before the final visit; mortality from all causes in each of the two trial groups: death of the patient, from any cause. Negative PCR swab at 3 ± 1 and 12 ± 2 days after entering the study. Ivermectin safety: it will be analyzed according to the incidence of adverse events that patients present in the intervention and control groups. The end of study (EOS) is recorded as the day the patient is discharged or death. Discharge will be granted according to the current recommendations of the Ministry of Public Health of the Province of Corrientes. A follow-up visit (EOF) will be made by phone 30 days after the EOS when vital status will be verified. Randomization Randomization will be done through a web system with randomly permuted blocks. Randomization will be carried out by one of the investigators who will not participate in the inclusion of patients or in the delivery of medication (Table 3 ). Table 3 EOS end of study, EOF end of follow-up Visit Basal and randomization, day 0 Day 3 ± 1 Day 12 ± 2 V#1 V#2 V#3 EOS EOF Informed consent X – – – – Inclusion/exclusion criteria X – – – – Demographic data and medical history X – – – – Concomitant medication X – – – – Vital signs* X X – – – Anthropometric data ^ X – – – – Basal laboratory X – – – – PCR swab – X X – – Assessment of adverse events – X X X – Final objective evaluation – X X X X Randomization X – – – – Adherence to treatment X X – – – *Includes heart rate, temperature, and oxygen saturation by a digital saturometer ^Includes weight and height Blinding (masking) The participants, investigators, care providers, and outcome assessors will be blinded. Numbers to be randomized (sample size) We will include a total of 500 patients (250 patients in each group). Trial status This is version 1.0, 17 August 2020. The recruitment started on 19 August 2020, and we anticipate the trial will finish recruitment on 31 December 2020. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04529525 . Registered on 26 August 2020 Full protocol The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1 ). In the interest of expediting the dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

Abstract Aims Infective endocarditis (IE) is a life-threatening disease associated with high mortality and morbidity worldwide. We sought to determine how socioeconomic factors might influence its epidemiology, clinical presentation, investigation and management, and outcome, in a large international multicentre registry. Methods and results The EurObservational Programme (EORP) of the European Society of Cardiology EURO-ENDO (European Infective Endocarditis) registry comprises a prospective cohort of 3113 adult patients admitted for IE in 156 hospitals in 40 countries between January 2016 and March 2018. Patients were separated in three groups, according to World Bank economic stratification [group 1: high income (75.6%); group 2: upper-middle income (15.4%); group 3: lower-middle income (9.1%)]. Group 3 patients were younger [median age (interquartile range, IQR): group 1, 66 (53–75) years; group 2, 57 (41–68) years; group 3, 33 (26–43) years; P < 0.001] with a higher frequency of smokers, intravenous drug use, and human immunodeficiency virus infection (all P < 0.001) and presented later [median (IQR) days since symptom onset: group 1, 12 (3–35); group 2, 19 (6–54); group 3, 31 (12–62); P < 0.001] with a higher likelihood of developing congestive heart failure (13.6%, 11.1%, and 22.6%, respectively; P < 0.001) and persistent fever (9.8%, 14.2%, and 27.9%, respectively; P < 0.001). Among 2157 (69.3%) patients with theoretical indication for cardiac surgery, surgery was performed less frequently in group 3 patients (75.5%, 76.8%, and 51.3%, respectively; P < 0.001), who also demonstrated the highest mortality (15.0%, 23.0%, and 23.7%, respectively; P < 0.001). Conclusion Socioeconomic factors influence the clinical profile of patients presenting with IE across the world. Despite younger age, patients from the poorest countries presented with more frequent complications and higher mortality associated with delayed diagnosis and lower use of surgery. Graphical Abstract

Aims - Infective endocarditis (IE) is a life-threatening disease associated with high mortality and morbidity worldwide. We sought to determine how socioeconomic factors might influence its epidemiology, clinical presentation, investigation and management, and outcome, in a large international multicentre registry. Methods and results - The EurObservational Programme (EORP) of the European Society of Cardiology EURO-ENDO (European Infective Endocarditis) registry comprises a prospective cohort of 3113 adult patients admitted for IE in 156 hospitals in 40 countries between January 2016 and March 2018. Patients were separated in three groups, according to World Bank economic stratification [group 1: high income (75.6%); group 2: upper-middle income (15.4%); group 3: lower-middle income (9.1%)]. Group 3 patients were younger [median age (interquartile range, IQR): group 1, 66 (53-75) years; group 2, 57 (41-68) years; group 3, 33 (26-43) years; P < 0.001] with a higher frequency of smokers, intravenous drug use, and human immunodeficiency virus infection (all P < 0.001) and presented later [median (IQR) days since symptom onset: group 1, 12 (3-35); group 2, 19 (6-54); group 3, 31 (12-62); P < 0.001] with a higher likelihood of developing congestive heart failure (13.6%, 11.1%, and 22.6%, respectively; P < 0.001) and persistent fever (9.8%, 14.2%, and 27.9%, respectively; P < 0.001). Among 2157 (69.3%) patients with theoretical indication for cardiac surgery, surgery was performed less frequently in group 3 patients (75.5%, 76.8%, and 51.3%, respectively; P < 0.001), who also demonstrated the highest mortality (15.0%, 23.0%, and 23.7%, respectively; P < 0.001). Conclusion - Socioeconomic factors influence the clinical profile of patients presenting with IE across the world. Despite younger age, patients from the poorest countries presented with more frequent complications and higher mortality associated with delayed diagnosis and lower use of surgery.

IntroductionChagas disease (CD) is one of the most neglected diseases in the world. In Latin America, CD is endemic in 21 countries, with an estimated 70 million people at risk of infection. Current treatments are limited to two nitroheterocyclic compounds: nifurtimox and benznidazole (BZN). Each has significant limitations, including long duration and safety concerns. However, data from recently completed studies suggest that reduced-duration regimens may be equally effective while enhancing safety.Methods and analysisNuestroBen is a phase III, randomised, multicentre clinical trial designed to assess whether shorter (2- and 4-week) regimens of BZN are non-inferior to the standard 8-week treatment. A total of 540 adult participants with no evidence of organ damage (the indeterminate form) or with mild cardiac progression (mild electrocardiographic alterations and without systolic dysfunction or symptoms), all in the chronic phase of CD, will be recruited at six study sites in Argentina and two study sites in Bolivia. Participants will be randomised to receive one of the two shortened regimens of BZN (300 mg per day for 2 or 4 weeks) or standard treatment (300 mg per day for 8 weeks). The primary endpoint is sustained elimination of parasitaemia from the end of treatment through 12 months of follow-up. Secondary endpoints will assess sustained clearance of parasitaemia at 1, 4, 6 and 8 months of follow-up from the end of treatment, drug tolerability and adherence to treatment. NuestroBen will also evaluate whether two shortened regimens of BZN improve drug tolerability and treatment adherence compared with the current standard treatment while maintaining efficacy in participants with the indeterminate form of CD or with mild cardiac involvement.Ethics and disseminationIn Argentina, this study was approved by Fundación de Estudios Farmacológicos y Medicamentos ‘Luis M. Zieher’ for its conduct at the Instituto de Cardiología de Corrientes ‘Juana Francisca Cabral’ (reference: NuestroBen-2020/2021) and the Instituto Nacional de Parasitología ‘Dr. Mario Fatala Chaben’ (reference: NuestroBen-2020/2021) by Comité Institucional de Ética de Investigación en Salud for the Centro de Chagas y Patología Regional de Santiago del Estero (reference: NuestroBen-2020-088/2021), by Comité de Ética en Investigación for the Hospital de Infecciosas F.J. Muñiz (reference: NuestroBen-2020–4037) and the Hospital General de Agudos D.F. Santojanni (reference: NuestroBen-2020–4039) and by Comité de Bioética for the Fundación Huésped (reference: NuestroBen-2020/2021). In Bolivia, it was approved by Comité de Ética en Investigación en Salud from the Universidad Autónoma Juan Misael Saracho (reference: NuestroBen-2020/2025). All participants are asked to provide written informed consent to participate. Recruitment processes started in July 2023, and as of 15 June 2025, 140 participants have been recruited. Findings will be shared with Argentinian and Bolivian public health officials and with the Chagas and tropical medicine communities via international conferences. Findings will also be published in medical journals.Trial registration numberNCT04897516.

Background The burden of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in Latin America is high. Little is known about healthcare workers’ (HCWs) knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of antimicrobial stewardship (AS), AMR, and antibiotic use (AU) in the region. Methods HCWs from 42 hospitals from 5 Latin American countries were invited to take an electronic, voluntary, anonymous survey regarding knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of AS, AMR, and AU between March–April 2023. Findings Overall, 996 HCWs completed the survey (52% physicians, 32% nurses, 11% pharmacists, 3% microbiologists, and 2% “other”). More than 90% of respondents indicated optimizing AU was a priority at their healthcare facility (HCF), 69% stated the importance of AS was communicated at their HCF, and 23% were unfamiliar with the term “antibiotic stewardship”. Most (> 95%) respondents acknowledged that appropriate AU can reduce AMR; however, few thought AU (< 30%) or AMR (< 50%) were a problem in their HCF. Lack of access to antibiogram and to locally endorsed guidelines was reported by 51% and 34% of HCWs, respectively. Among prescribers, 53% did not consider non-physicians’ opinions to make antibiotic-related decisions, 22% reported not receiving education on how to select antibiotics based on culture results and 60% stated patients and families influence their antibiotic decisions. Conclusions Although HCWs perceived improving AU as a priority, they did not perceive AU or AMR as a problem in their HCF. AS opportunities include improved access to guidelines, access to AMR/AU data, teamwork, and education on AS for HCWs and patients and families.