Explore the vast range of titles available.

Acute ischemic stroke is currently a major cause of disability despite improvement in recanalization therapies. Stem cells represent a promising innovative strategy focused on reduction of neurologic sequelae by enhancement of brain plasticity. We performed a phase IIa, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-center, pilot clinical trial. Patients aged ≥60 years with moderate to severe stroke (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale [NIHSS] 8–20) were randomized (1:1) to receive intravenous adipose tissue–derived mesenchymal stem cells (AD-MSCs) or placebo within the first 2 weeks of stroke onset. The primary outcome was safety, evaluating adverse events (AEs), neurologic and systemic complications, and tumor development. The secondary outcome evaluated treatment efficacy by measuring modified Rankin Scale (mRS), NIHSS, infarct size, and blood biomarkers. We report the final trial results after 24 months of follow-up. Recruitment began in December 2014 and stopped in December 2017 after 19 of 20 planned patients were included. Six patients did not receive study treatment: two due to technical issues and four for acquiring exclusion criteria after randomization. The final study sample was composed of 13 patients (4 receiving AD-MSCs and 9 placebo). One patient in the placebo group died within the first week after study treatment delivery due to sepsis. Two non-treatment-related serious AEs occurred in the AD-MSC group and nine in the placebo group. The total number of AEs and systemic or neurologic complications was similar between the study groups. No injection-related AEs were registered, nor tumor development. At 24 months of follow-up, patients in the AD-MSC group showed a nonsignificantly lower median NIHSS score (interquartile range, 3 [3–5.5] vs 7 [0–8]). Neither treatment group had differences in mRS scores throughout follow-up visits up to month 24. Therefore, intravenous treatment with AD-MSCs within the first 2 weeks from ischemic stroke was safe at 24 months of follow-up.

Background and Objectives Controversy exists regarding dose adjustment in patients treated with voriconazole due to the severity of the infections for which it is prescribed. The Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (DPWG) recommends a 50% dose increase or decrease for cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C19 ultrarapid (UM) or poor (PM) metabolizers, respectively. In contrast, for the previous phenotypes, the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) voriconazole guideline only recommends a change of treatment. Based on observed data from single-dose bioequivalence studies and steady-state observed concentrations, we aimed to investigate voriconazole dose adjustments by means of physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling. Methods PBPK modeling was used to optimize voriconazole single-dose models for each CYP2C19 phenotype, which were extrapolated to steady state and evaluated for concordance with the therapeutic range of voriconazole. Based on optimized models, dose adjustments were evaluated for better adjustment to the therapeutic range. Results Our models suggest that the standard dose may only be appropriate for normal metabolizers (NM), although they would benefit from a 50–100% loading dose increase. Intermediate metabolizers (IMs) and PMs required a daily dose reduction of 50 and 75%, respectively. Rapid metabolizers (RMs) and UMs required a daily dose increase of 100% and 300%, respectively. Conclusion The prescription of voriconazole in clinical practice should be personalized according to the CYP2C19 phenotype, followed by therapeutic drug monitoring of plasma concentrations to guide dose adjustment.

Background/Objectives: Post-market surveillance of COVID-19 vaccines is vital. This study analyzed EudraVigilance data (Jan 2021–Dec 2023) to detect potential safety signals linking COVID-19 vaccines and specific neurological adverse events (aseptic meningitis, Guillain–Barré syndrome, polyradiculoneuropathies, multiple sclerosis, transverse myelitis, neuromyelitis optica). It also explored the impact of non-healthcare professional reports on disproportionality analysis. Methods: EudraVigilance reports were analyzed to quantify neurological events for 5 COVID-19 vaccines and 47 comparators. Disproportionality was assessed using the Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR). Spearman’s correlation (SCC) was used to examine the impact of non-healthcare professional reports on PRR. Results: An analysis of 4,159,820 COVID-19 vaccine and 114,025 comparator reports showed a reporting decline over time. A higher proportion of adverse drug event reports were submitted by non-healthcare professionals for COVID-19 vaccines compared to control vaccines, a trend observed consistently across 2021 (57.3% vs. 33%, p < 0.001), 2022 (59.4% vs. 36.5%, p = 0.001), and 2023 (42% vs. 24.36%, p = 0.006). In 2023, significant signals (PRR ≥ 2) were found between Jcovden© and polyradiculoneuropathy (PRR 5.4, IC 95% 3.98–7.32), multiple sclerosis (PRR 2.72, IC 95% (1.08–6.87), transverse myelitis (PRR 4.68, IC 95% 1.02–21.35) and neuromyelitis optica (PRR 7.79, IC 95% 3.5–17.37). In addition, both Spikevax© and Comirnaty© showed significant signals with multiple sclerosis (PRR 2.50, IC 95% 1.70–3.68, and PRR 2.33, IC 95% 1.68–3.24) and transverse myelitis (PRR 3.50, IC 95% 1.66–7.50 and PRR 3.58, IC 95% 1.85–6.93). A significant negative correlation between the proportion of reports from non-healthcare professionals and the case/no-case ratio was found (SCC = −0.4683, p = 0.009). Conclusions: While some significant signals emerged in 2023, the combined three-year data showed no vaccine exceeding the PRR threshold of 2. High-quality data and bias mitigation strategies are crucial for accurate PRR estimation in pharmacovigilance and public health.

Several cytochrome P450 (CYP) CYP3A polymorphisms were associated with reduced enzyme function. We aimed to evaluate the influence of these alleles on the pharmacokinetic parameters (PK) of several CYP3A substrates. We included 251 healthy volunteers who received a single dose of ambrisentan, atorvastatin, imatinib, aripiprazole, fentanyl, amlodipine, donepezil, olanzapine, fesoterodine, or quetiapine. The volunteers were genotyped for CYP3A4 and CYP3A5 polymorphisms by qPCR. To compare the PK across studies, measurements were corrected by the mean of each parameter for every drug and were logarithmically transformed. Neither CYP3A phenotype nor individual CYP3A4 or CYP3A5 polymorphisms were significantly associated with differences in PK. However, regarding the substrates that are exclusively metabolized by CYP3A, we observed a higher normalized AUC (p = 0.099) and a tendency of lower normalized Cl (p = 0.069) in CYP3A4 mutated allele carriers what was associated with diminished drug metabolism capacity. CYP3A4 polymorphisms did not show a pronounced influence on PK of the analysed drugs. If so, their impact could be detectable in a very small percentage of subjects. Although there are few subjects carrying CYP3A4 double mutations, the effect in those might be relevant, especially due to the majority of subjects lacking the CYP3A5 enzyme. In heterozygous subjects, the consequence might be less noticeable due to the high inducible potential of the CYP3A4 enzyme.

Objectives • Primary objective: to evaluate the effect of intravenous melatonin (IVM) on mortality in adult patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with COVID-19. • Secondary objectives: ◦ To evaluate the effect of IVM on ICU length of stay. ◦ To evaluate the effect of IVM on the length of mechanical ventilation (MV). ◦ To evaluate if the use of IVM is associated with an increase in the number of ventilator-free days. ◦ To evaluate if the use of IVM is associated with a reduced number of failing organs as determined by the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scale. ◦ To evaluate if the use of IVM is associated with a reduction of the frequency and severity of COVID-19-associated thromboembolic phenomena. ◦ To evaluate if the use of IVM is associated with a decreased systemic inflammatory response assessed by plasma levels of ferritin, D-dimer, C-reactive protein, procalcitonin and interleukin-6. ◦ To evaluate if the use of IVM is associated with an improvement in hematologic parameters. ◦ To evaluate if the use of IVM is associated with an improvement in biochemical parameters. ◦ To evaluate if the use of IVM is associated with an improvement in blood gas analysis parameters. ◦ To evaluate adverse events during the 28 day study period. Trial design Phase II, single center, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial with a two-arm parallel group design and 2:1 allocation ratio. Participants Only critically ill adult patients that fulfill all of the inclusion criteria and none of the exclusion criteria will be included. The study will be conducted in a mixed ICU of a publicly funded tertiary referral center in Madrid, Spain with a 30-bed capacity and 1100 admissions per year. • Inclusion criteria: ◦ Patient, family member or legal guardian has provided written Informed Consent. ◦ Age ε 18 years. ◦ Confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection with compatible symptoms AND a positive RT-PCR. ◦ Admission to the ICU with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure attributed to SARS-CoV-2 infection. ◦ ICU length of stay of less than 7 days prior to randomization with or without MV and without signs of improvement in respiratory failure (MURRAY score at randomization greater or equal to the MURRAY score at ICU admission). • Exclusion criteria: ◦ Participant in a different COVID-19 study in which the study drug is under clinical development and hasn’t been previously authorized for commercialization. ◦ Liver enzymes > 5 times the upper normal range. ◦ Chronic kidney disease with GFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m 2 (stage 4 or greater) or need for hemodialysis. ◦ Pregnancy. A pregnancy test will be performed on every woman younger than 55 years of age prior to inclusion. ◦ Terminal surgical or medical illness. ◦ Autoimmune disease. ◦ Any patient condition that can prevent the study procedures to be carried out at the treating physician’s judgement. Intervention and comparator All patients will receive standard-of-care treatment according to the current institutional protocols. In addition, patients will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive: • Experimental group (12 patients): 7 days of 5 mg per Kg of actual body weight per day of intravenous melatonin every 6 hours. Maximum daily dose 500 mg per day. • Control group (6 patients): 7 days of 5 mg per Kg of actual body weight per day of intravenous identically-looking placebo every 6 hours. After 3 days of treatment, 3 intensive care physicians will evaluate the participant and decide whether or not to complete the treatment based on their clinical assessment: • If objective or subjective signs of improvement or no worsening of the general clinical condition, respiratory failure, inflammatory state or multi-organ failure are observed, the participant will continue the treatment until completion. • If an adverse effect or clinical impairment is observed that is objectively or subjectively attributable to the study drug the treatment will be stopped. Main outcome Mortality in each study group represented in frequency and time-to-event at day 28 after randomization Randomization The randomization sequence was created using SAS version 9.4 statistical software (programmed and validated macros) with a 2:1 allocation. No randomization seed was pre-specified. The randomization seed was generated using the time on the computer where the program was executed. Blinding (masking) Participants, caregivers and study groups will be blinded to arm allocation. Numbers to be randomized (sample size) A total of 18 patients will be randomized in this trial: 12 to the experimental arm and 6 to the control arm. Trial Status Protocol version 2.0, June 5 th 2020. Trial status: recruitment not started. The first patient is expected to be recruited in October 2020. The last patient is anticipated to be recruited in August 2021. Trial registration EU Clinical Trials Register. Date of trial registration: 10 July 2020. URL: https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2020-001808-42/ES Full protocol The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1 ). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

IntroductionStroke is a serious public health problem, given it is a major cause of disability worldwide despite the spread of recanalisation therapies. Enhancement of brain plasticity with stem cell administration is a promising innovative therapy to reduce sequelae in these patients.Methods and analysisWe have developed a phase IIb, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial protocol to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravenous administration of allogeneic adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells (AD-MSCs) in patients with acute ischaemic stroke, concurrently with conventional stroke treatment. Thirty patients will be randomised on a 1:1 basis to receive either intravenous placebo or allogeneic AD-MSCs as soon as possible within the first 4 days from stroke symptom onset. Patients will be followed up to 24 months after randomisation. The primary objective is the safety assessment of early intravenous administration of allogeneic AD-MSCs by reporting all adverse events and neurological or systemic complications in both treatment groups. Secondary objectives assess efficacy of early intravenous AD-MSC treatment in acute ischaemic stroke by evaluating changes in the modified Rankin Scale and the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale throughout the follow-up period. In addition, brain repair biomarkers will be measured at various visits.Ethics and disseminationThis clinical trial has been approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of La Paz University Hospital (Madrid, Spain) and by the Spanish Agency of Medication and Health Products and has been registered in Eudra CT (2019-001724-35) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04280003). Study results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications in Open Access format and at conference presentations.

There is a strong association between genetic polymorphisms and the acenocoumarol dosage requirements. Genotyping the polymorphisms involved in the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of acenocoumarol before starting anticoagulant therapy would result in a better quality of life and a more efficient use of healthcare resources. The objective of this study is to develop a new algorithm that includes clinical and genetic variables to predict the most appropriate acenocoumarol dosage for stable anticoagulation in a wide range of patients. We recruited 685 patients from 2 Spanish hospitals and 1 primary healthcare center. We randomly chose 80% of the patients (n = 556), considering an equitable distribution of genotypes to form the generation cohort. The remaining 20% (n = 129) formed the validation cohort. Multiple linear regression was used to generate the algorithm using the acenocoumarol stable dosage as the dependent variable and the clinical and genotypic variables as the independent variables. The variables included in the algorithm were age, weight, amiodarone use, enzyme inducer status, international normalized ratio target range and the presence of CYP2C9*2 (rs1799853), CYP2C9*3 (rs1057910), VKORC1 (rs9923231) and CYP4F2 (rs2108622). The coefficient of determination (R2) explained by the algorithm was 52.8% in the generation cohort and 64% in the validation cohort. The following R2 values were evaluated by pathology: atrial fibrillation, 57.4%; valve replacement, 56.3%; and venous thromboembolic disease, 51.5%. When the patients were classified into 3 dosage groups according to the stable dosage (<11 mg/week, 11-21 mg/week, >21 mg/week), the percentage of correctly classified patients was higher in the intermediate group, whereas differences between pharmacogenetic and clinical algorithms increased in the extreme dosage groups. Our algorithm could improve acenocoumarol dosage selection for patients who will begin treatment with this drug, especially in extreme-dosage patients. The predictability of the pharmacogenetic algorithm did not vary significantly between diseases.

BACKGROUND: From March to April 2020, Spain was the center of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, particularly Madrid with approximately 30% of the cases in Spain. The aim of this study is to report the suspected serious adverse drug reactions (SADRs) in COVID-19 patients vs. non-COVID-19 patients detected by the prospective pharmacovigilance program based on automatic laboratory signals (ALSs) in the hospital (PPLSH) during that period. We also compared the results with the suspected SADRs detected during the same period for 2019. METHODS: All ALSs that reflected potential SADRs including neutropenia, pancytopenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia, eosinophilia, leukocytes in cerebrospinal fluid, hepatitis, pancreatitis, acute kidney injury, rhabdomyolysis, and hyponatremia were prospectively monitored in hospitalized patients during the study periods. We analyzed the incidence and the distribution of causative drugs for the COVID-19 patients. RESULTS: The incidence rate of SADRs detected in the COVID-19 patients was 760.63 (95% CI 707.89–816.01) per 10,000 patients, 4.75-fold higher than the SADR rate for non-COVID-19 patients (160.15 per 10,000 patients, 95% CI 137.09–186.80), and 5.84-fold higher than the SADR rate detected for the same period in 2019 (130.19 per 10,000 patients, 95% CI 109.53–154.36). The most frequently related drugs were tocilizumab (59.84%), dexketoprofen (13.93%), azithromycin (8.43%), lopinavir-ritonavir (7.35%), dexamethasone (7.62%), and chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine (6.91%). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence rate of SADRs detected by the PPSLH in patients with COVID-19 was 4.75-fold higher than that of the non-COVID-19 patients. Caution is recommended when using medications for COVID-19 patients, especially drugs that are hepatotoxic, myotoxic, and those that induce thromboembolic events.

Objectives Primary objective: to evaluate the efficacy of melatonin as a prophylactic treatment on prevention of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure. Secondary objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of melatonin as a prophylactic treatment on prevention of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. To evaluate the efficacy of melatonin to prevent the development of severe COVID-19 in the participants enrolled in this study who develop SARS-CoV-2 infection along the trial. To evaluate the duration of COVID-19 symptoms in participants receiving melatonin before the infection. To evaluate seroconversion timing post-symptom onset. Exploratory objectives : To compare severity of COVID-19 between men and women. To evaluate the influence of sleep and diet on prevention from SARS-CoV-2 infection. To evaluate the effect of melatonin on the incidence and characteristics of lymphopenia and increase of inflammatory cytokines related to COVID-19. Trial design This is a two-arm parallel randomised double-blind controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of melatonin versus placebo in the prophylaxis of coronavirus disease 2019 among healthcare workers. Participants Inclusion Criteria: Male or female participants ≥ 18 and ≤ 80 years of age. Healthcare workers from the public and private Spanish hospital network at risk of SARS-CoV 2 infection. Not having a previous COVID19 diagnosis. Understanding the purpose of the trial and not having taken any pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) including HIV PrEP from March 1 st 2020 until study enrolment. Having a negative SARS-CoV 2 reverse-transcription PCR (RT-PCR) result or a negative serologic rapid test (IgM/IgG) result before randomization. Premenopausal women must have a negative urinary pregnancy test in the 7 days before starting the trial treatment. Premenopausal women and males with premenopausal couples must commit to using a high efficiency anticonceptive method. Exclusion Criteria: HIV infection. Active hepatitis B infection. Renal failure (CrCl < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2) or need for hemodialysis. Osteoporosis. Myasthenia gravis. Pre-existent maculopathy. Retinitis pigmentosa. Bradycardia (less than 50 bpm). Weight less than 40 Kg. Participant with any immunosuppressive condition or hematological disease. Treatment with drugs that may prolong QT in the last month before randomization for more than 7 days including: azithromycin, chlorpromazine, cisapride, clarithromycin, domperidone, droperidol, erythromycin, halofantrine, haloperidol, lumefantrine, mefloquine, methadone, pentamidine, procainamide, quinidine, quinine, sotalol, sparfloxacin, thioridazine, amiodarone. Hereditary intolerance to galactose, Lapp lactase deficiency or glucose or galactose malabsorption. Treatment with fluvoxamine. Treatment with benzodiazepines or benzodiazepine analogues such as zolpidem, zopiclone or zaleplon. Pregnancy. Breastfeeding. History of potentially immune derived diseases such as: lupus, Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, vasculitis or rheumatoid arthritis. Insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Known history of hypersensitivity to the study drug or any of its components. Patients that should not be included in the study at the judgment of the research team. Participants will be recruited from the following eight hospitals in Madrid, Spain: Hospital Universitario La Paz, Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Hospital Infanta Sofía, Hospital 12 de Octubre, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Hospital Central de la defensa Gómez Ulla,Hospital de La Princesa and Hospital Infanta Leonor. Intervention and comparator Experimental: Melatonin (Circadin®, Exeltis Healthcare, Spain): 2 mg of melatonin orally before bedtime for 12 weeks. Comparator : Identical looking placebo (Laboratorios Liconsa, Spain) orally before bedtime for 12 weeks. Main outcomes Number of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) symptomatic infections confirmed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test or serologic test or according to each centre diagnosis protocol. Primary outcome will be measured until the end of treatment for each participant (until the date of the last dose taken by each patient). Randomisation Patients who meet all inclusion and no exclusion criteria will be randomised, stratified by centres, sex and age (<50 and ≥ 50 years old). The randomisation sequence was created using SAS version 9.4 statistical software (procedure ‘PROC PLAN’) with a 1:1 allocation. No randomisation seed was specified. The randomisation seed was generated taking the hour of the computer where the program was executed. Randomization will be done centrally through the electronic system RedCAP® in order to conceal the sequence until interventions are assigned Blinding (masking) Participants, caregivers, and those assessing the outcomes are blinded to group assignment. Numbers to be randomised (sample size) A total of 450 participants are planned to be enrolled in this clinical trial, 225 in the experimental arm and 225 in the placebo arm. Trial Status Protocol version 3.0, 17th of April 2020. Recruitment ongoing. First participant was recruited on the 21st of April 2020. The final participant is anticipated to be recruited on the 31st of May 2020. As of May 18th, 2020, a total of 312 participants have been enrolled (154 at Hospital La Paz, 85 at Hospital Infanta Sofía and 73 at Hospital 12 de Octubre). Trial registration EU Clinical Trials Register: 2020-001530-35; Date of trial registration: 13th of April 2020; https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2020-001530-35/ES Full protocol The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1 ). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

The field of pharmacogenetics (PGx) holds great promise in advancing personalized medicine by adapting treatments based on individual genetic profiles. Despite its benefits, there are still economic, ethical and institutional barriers that hinder its implementation in our healthcare environment. A retrospective analysis approach of anonymized data sourced from electronic health records was performed, encompassing a diverse patient population and evaluating key parameters such as prescribing patterns and test results, to assess the impact of pharmacogenetic testing. A head-to-head comparison with previously published activity results within the same pharmacogenetic laboratory was also conducted to contrast the progress made after 10 years. The analysis revealed significant utilization of pharmacogenetic testing in daily clinical practice, with 1,145 pharmacogenetic tests performed over a 1-year period and showing a 35% growth rate increase over time. Of the 17 different medical departments that sought PGx tests, the Oncology department accounted for the highest number, representing 58.47% of all genotyped patients. A total of 1,000 PGx tests were requested for individuals susceptible to receive a dose modification based on genotype, and 76 individuals received a genotype-guided dose adjustment. This study presents a comprehensive descriptive analysis of real-world data obtained from a public tertiary hospital laboratory specialized in pharmacogenetic testing, and presents data that strongly endorse the integration of pharmacogenetic testing into everyday clinical practice.