Search

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of a single dose of pegylated interferon lambda in preventing clinical events among outpatients with acute symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, controlled, adaptive platform trial involving predominantly vaccinated adults with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in Brazil and Canada. Outpatients who presented with an acute clinical condition consistent with Covid-19 within 7 days after the onset of symptoms received either pegylated interferon lambda (single subcutaneous injection, 180/xg) or placebo (single injection or oral). The primary composite outcome was hospitalization (or transfer to a tertiary hospital) or an emergency department visit (observation for >6 hours) due to Covid-19 within 28 days after randomization. RESULTS: A total of 933 patients were assigned to receive pegylated interferon lambda (2 were subsequently excluded owing to protocol deviations) and 1018 were assigned to receive placebo. Overall, 83% of the patients had been vaccinated, and during the trial, multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants had emerged. A total of 25 of 931 patients (2.7%) in the interferon group had a primary-outcome event, as compared with 57 of 1018 (5.6%) in the placebo group, a difference of 51% (relative risk, 0.49; 95% Bayesian credible interval, 0.30 to 0.76; posterior probability of superiority to placebo, >99.9%). Results were generally consistent in analyses of secondary outcomes, including time to hospitalization for Covid-19 (hazard ratio, 0.57; 95% Bayesian credible interval, 0.33 to 0.95) and Covid-19-related hospitalization or death (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% Bayesian credible interval, 0.35 to 0.97). The effects were consistent across dominant variants and independent of vaccination status. Among patients with a high viral load at baseline, those who received pegylated interferon lambda had lower viral loads by day 7 than those who received placebo. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among predominantly vaccinated outpatients with Covid-19, the incidence of hospitalization or an emergency department visit (observation for >6 hours) was significantly lower among those who received a single dose of pegylated interferon lambda than among those who received placebo. (Funded by FastGrants and others; TOGETHER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04727424.) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Algae-derived nutraceuticals, such as spirulina, have been reported to have biological activities that may minimize clinical consequences to COVID-19 infections., Objectives: This study aimed to determine whether spirulina is an effective treatment for high-risk patients with early COVID-19 in an outpatient setting., Methods: The TOGETHER trial is a placebo-controlled, randomized, platform trial conducted in Brazil. Eligible participants were symptomatic adults with a positive rapid test for SARS-CoV-2 older than 50 y or with a known risk factor for disease severity. Patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo or spirulina (1 g twice daily for 14 d). The primary end point was hospitalization defined as either retention in a COVID-19 emergency setting for >6 h or transfer to tertiary hospital owing to COVID-19 at 28 d. Secondary outcomes included time-to-hospitalization, mortality, and adverse drug reactions. We used a Bayesian framework to compare spirulina with placebo., Results: We recruited 1126 participants, 569 randomly assigned to spirulina and 557 to placebo. The median age was 49.0 y, and 65.3% were female. The primary outcome occurred in 11.2% in the spirulina group and 8.1% in the placebo group (odds ratio [OR]: 1.24; 95% credible interval: 0.84, 1.86). There were no differences in emergency department visit (OR: 1.21; 95% credible interval: 0.81, 1.83), nor time to symptom relief (hazard ratio: 0.90; 95% credible interval: 0.79, 1.03). Spirulina also not demonstrate important treatment effects in the prespecified subgroups defined by age, sex, BMI, days since symptom onset, or vaccination status., Conclusions: Spirulina has no any clinical benefits as an outpatient therapy for COVID-19 compared with placebo with respect to reducing the retention in an emergency setting or COVID-19-related hospitalization. There are no differences between spirulina and placebo for other secondary outcomes. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT04727424., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Introduction: Health technology assessment (HTA) plays a vital role in healthcare decision-making globally, necessitating the identification of key factors impacting evaluation outcomes due to the significant workload faced by HTA agencies., Objectives: The aim of this study was to predict the approval status of evaluations conducted by the Brazilian Committee for Health Technology Incorporation (CONITEC) using natural language processing (NLP)., Methods: Data encompassing CONITEC's official report summaries from 2012 to 2022. Textual data was tokenized for NLP analysis. Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator, logistic regression, support vector machine, random forest, neural network, and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), were evaluated for accuracy, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC AUC) score, precision, and recall. Cluster analysis using the k-modes algorithm categorized entries into two clusters (approved, rejected)., Results: The neural network model exhibited the highest accuracy metrics (precision at 0.815, accuracy at 0.769, ROC AUC at 0.871, and recall at 0.746), followed by XGBoost model. The lexical analysis uncovered linguistic markers, like references to international HTA agencies' experiences and government as demandant, potentially influencing CONITEC's decisions. Cluster and XGBoost analyses emphasized that approved evaluations mainly concerned drug assessments, often government-initiated, while non-approved ones frequently evaluated drugs, with the industry as the requester., Conclusions: NLP model can predict health technology incorporation outcomes, opening avenues for future research using HTA reports from other agencies. This model has the potential to enhance HTA system efficiency by offering initial insights and decision-making criteria, thereby benefiting healthcare experts.

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Brazilian health technology assessment processes based on public reports from the National Committee for Health Technology Incorporation (CONITEC)., Methods: This descriptive study analyzed CONITEC's official reports on Brazil available on its website between 2018 and 2021 that aimed to propose recommendations for technologies to be incorporated into its public healthcare system. We used descriptive statistics covering the number of technologies and number of reports about drugs per year, objective, type of technology, demanding sector, and outcome before 2018 to 2019 and during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2021). Furthermore, we used logistic regression to explore any association between the final decision labeled as "incorporated" and the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic., Results: A total of 278 reports were analyzed. Approximately 85% (136 of 278), 79% (220 of 278), and 45% of the reports (125 of 278) were about drugs, for incorporation, and requested by the government, respectively. Moreover, 74 of 130 (57%) and 56 of 148 decisions (38%) were "incorporated" before and during the pandemic, respectively. No significant association was noted between incorporated decisions and the arrival of the COVID-19 pandemic for all technologies (odds ratio 1.43; 95% CI 0.84-2.46; P = .192) and for drugs (odds ratio 1.43; 95% confidence interval 0.81-2.53; P = .223) while adjusting for the type of technology and demandant., Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic has brought many challenges, but it does not seem to have had a significant impact on the health technology assessment approval decisions of CONITEC in Brazil., (Copyright © 2023 International Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Recent evidence indicates a potential therapeutic role of fluvoxamine for COVID-19. In the TOGETHER trial for acutely symptomatic patients with COVID-19, we aimed to assess the efficacy of fluvoxamine versus placebo in preventing hospitalisation defined as either retention in a COVID-19 emergency setting or transfer to a tertiary hospital due to COVID-19., Methods: This placebo-controlled, randomised, adaptive platform trial done among high-risk symptomatic Brazilian adults confirmed positive for SARS-CoV-2 included eligible patients from 11 clinical sites in Brazil with a known risk factor for progression to severe disease. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either fluvoxamine (100 mg twice daily for 10 days) or placebo (or other treatment groups not reported here). The trial team, site staff, and patients were masked to treatment allocation. Our primary outcome was a composite endpoint of hospitalisation defined as either retention in a COVID-19 emergency setting or transfer to tertiary hospital due to COVID-19 up to 28 days post-random assignment on the basis of intention to treat. Modified intention to treat explored patients receiving at least 24 h of treatment before a primary outcome event and per-protocol analysis explored patients with a high level adherence (>80%). We used a Bayesian analytic framework to establish the effects along with probability of success of intervention compared with placebo. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04727424) and is ongoing., Findings: The study team screened 9803 potential participants for this trial. The trial was initiated on June 2, 2020, with the current protocol reporting randomisation to fluvoxamine from Jan 20 to Aug 5, 2021, when the trial arms were stopped for superiority. 741 patients were allocated to fluvoxamine and 756 to placebo. The average age of participants was 50 years (range 18-102 years); 58% were female. The proportion of patients observed in a COVID-19 emergency setting for more than 6 h or transferred to a teritary hospital due to COVID-19 was lower for the fluvoxamine group compared with placebo (79 [11%] of 741 vs 119 [16%] of 756); relative risk [RR] 0·68; 95% Bayesian credible interval [95% BCI]: 0·52-0·88), with a probability of superiority of 99·8% surpassing the prespecified superiority threshold of 97·6% (risk difference 5·0%). Of the composite primary outcome events, 87% were hospitalisations. Findings for the primary outcome were similar for the modified intention-to-treat analysis (RR 0·69, 95% BCI 0·53-0·90) and larger in the per-protocol analysis (RR 0·34, 95% BCI, 0·21-0·54). There were 17 deaths in the fluvoxamine group and 25 deaths in the placebo group in the primary intention-to-treat analysis (odds ratio [OR] 0·68, 95% CI: 0·36-1·27). There was one death in the fluvoxamine group and 12 in the placebo group for the per-protocol population (OR 0·09; 95% CI 0·01-0·47). We found no significant differences in number of treatment emergent adverse events among patients in the fluvoxamine and placebo groups., Interpretation: Treatment with fluvoxamine (100 mg twice daily for 10 days) among high-risk outpatients with early diagnosed COVID-19 reduced the need for hospitalisation defined as retention in a COVID-19 emergency setting or transfer to a tertiary hospital., Funding: FastGrants and The Rainwater Charitable Foundation., Translation: For the Portuguese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Data on the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine or lopinavir-ritonavir for the treatment of high-risk outpatients with COVID-19 in developing countries are needed., Objective: To determine whether hydroxychloroquine or lopinavir-ritonavir reduces hospitalization among high-risk patients with early symptomatic COVID-19 in an outpatient setting., Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial was conducted in Brazil. Recently symptomatic adults diagnosed with respiratory symptoms from SARS-CoV-2 infection were enrolled between June 2 and September 30, 2020. The planned sample size was 1476 patients, with interim analyses planned after 500 patients were enrolled. The trial was stopped after the interim analysis for futility with a sample size of 685 patients. Statistical analysis was performed in December 2020., Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to hydroxychloroquine (800 mg loading dose, then 400 mg daily for 9 days), lopinavir-ritonavir (loading dose of 800 mg and 200 mg, respectively, every 12 hours followed by 400 mg and 100 mg, respectively, every 12 hours for the next 9 days), or placebo., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were COVID-19-associated hospitalization and death assessed at 90 days after randomization. COVID-19-associated hospitalization was analyzed with a Cox proportional hazards model. The trial included the following secondary outcomes: all-cause hospitalization, viral clearance, symptom resolution, and adverse events., Results: Of 685 participants, 632 (92.3%) self-identified as mixed-race, 377 (55.0%) were women, and the median (range) age was 53 (18-94) years. A total of 214 participants were randomized to hydroxychloroquine; 244, lopinavir-ritonavir; and 227, placebo. At first interim analysis, the data safety monitoring board recommended stopping enrollment of both hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir-ritonavir groups because of futility. The proportion of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 was 3.7% (8 participants) in the hydroxychloroquine group, 5.7% (14 participants) in the lopinavir-ritonavir group, and 4.8% (11 participants) in the placebo group. We found no significant differences between interventions for COVID-19-associated hospitalization (hydroxychloroquine: hazard ratio [HR], 0.76 [95% CI, 0.30-1.88]; lopinavir-ritonavir: HR, 1.16 [95% CI, 0.53-2.56] as well as for the secondary outcome of viral clearance through day 14 (hydroxychloroquine: odds ratio [OR], 0.91 [95% CI, 0.82-1.02]; lopinavir-ritonavir: OR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.94-1.16]). At the end of the trial, there were 3 fatalities recorded, 1 in the placebo group and 2 in the lopinavir-ritonavir intervention group., Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, neither hydroxychloroquine nor lopinavir-ritonavir showed any significant benefit for decreasing COVID-19-associated hospitalization or other secondary clinical outcomes. This trial suggests that expedient clinical trials can be implemented in low-income settings even during the COVID-19 pandemic., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04403100.

Background: Pelvic floor muscles (PFM) and rectus abdominis muscles (RAM) of pregnant diabetic rats exhibit atrophy, co-localization of fast and slow fibers and an increased collagen type I/III ratio. However, the role of similar PFM or RAM hyperglycemic-related myopathy in women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) remains poorly investigated. This study aims to assess the frequency of pelvic floor muscle disorders and pregnancy-specific urinary incontinence (PS-UI) 12 months after the Cesarean (C) section in women with GDM. Specifically, differences in PFM/RAM hyperglycemic myopathy will be evaluated., Methods: The Diamater is an ongoing cohort study of four groups of 59 pregnant women each from the Perinatal Diabetes Research Centre (PDRC), Botucatu Medical School (FMB)-UNESP (São Paulo State University), Brazil. Diagnosis of GDM and PS-UI will be made at 24-26 weeks, with a follow-up at 34-38 weeks of gestation. Inclusion in the study will occur at the time of C-section, and patients will be followed at 24-48 h, 6 weeks and 6 and 12 months postpartum. Study groups will be classified as (1) GDM plus PS-UI; (2) GDM without PS-UI; (3) Non-GDM plus PS-UI; and (4) Non-GDM without PS-UI. We will analyze relationships between GDM, PS-UI and hyperglycemic myopathy at 12 months after C-section. The mediator variables to be evaluated include digital palpation, vaginal squeeze pressure, 3D pelvic floor ultrasound, and 3D RAM ultrasound. RAM samples obtained during C-section will be analyzed for ex-vivo contractility, morphological, molecular and OMICS profiles to further characterize the hyperglycemic myopathy. Additional variables to be evaluated include maternal age, socioeconomic status, educational level, ethnicity, body mass index, weight gain during pregnancy, quality of glycemic control and insulin therapy., Discussion: To our knowledge, this will be the first study to provide data on the prevalence of PS-UI and RAM and PFM physical and biomolecular muscle profiles after C-section in mothers with GDM. The longitudinal design allows for the assessment of cause-effect relationships between GDM, PS-UI, and PFMs and RAMs myopathy. The findings may reveal previously undetermined consequences of GDM.