Search

Stroke is a leading cause of disability with limited effective interventions that improve recovery in the subacute phase. This protocol aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a non-invasive, extremely low-frequency, low-intensity, frequency-tuned electromagnetic field treatment [Electromagnetic Network Targeting Field (ENTF) therapy] in reducing disability and promoting recovery in people with subacute ischemic stroke (IS) with moderate-severe disability and upper extremity (UE) motor impairment. Following a sample-size adaptive design with a single interim analysis, at least 150 and up to 344 participants will be recruited to detect a 0.5-point (with a minimum of 0.33 points) difference on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) between groups with 80% power at a 5% significance level. This ElectroMAGnetic field Ischemic stroke-Novel subacutE treatment (EMAGINE) trial is a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, sham-controlled, parallel two-arm study to be conducted at approximately 20 United States sites, and enroll participants with subacute IS and moderate-severe disability with UE motor impairment. Participants will be assigned to active (ENTF) or sham treatment, initiated 4-21 days after stroke onset. The intervention, applied to the central nervous system, is designed for suitability in multiple clinical settings and at home. Primary endpoint is change in mRS score from baseline to 90 days post-stroke. Secondary endpoints: change from baseline to 90 days post-stroke on the Fugl-Meyer Assessment - UE (lead secondary endpoint), Box and Block Test, 10-Meter Walk, and others, to be analyzed in a hierarchical manner. EMAGINE will evaluate whether ENTF therapy is safe and effective at reducing disability following subacute IS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present review article thoroughly analyses natural products and their derived phytoconstituents as a rich source of plausible anticancer drugs. The study thoroughly explores the chemical components derived from various natural sources, thus emphasizing their unique structural characteristics and therapeutic potential as an anticancer agent. The review contains the critical chemical constituents' in-depth molecular mechanisms, their source's chemical structures and the categories. The review also comprises an exhaustive and comprehensive analysis of different chemical spacing parameters of the anticancer agents derived from natural products. It compares them with USFDA-approved synthetic anticancer drugs up to 2020, thus providing a meaningful understanding of the relationship between natural and synthetic compounds portraying the anticancer assets. The review also delves more deeply into the chemical analysis of the heterocyclic moieties from the natural product arena, illustrating the anticancer mechanisms. The present article is, therefore, expected to serve as a valuable resource for natural product and medicinal chemists, encouraging and promoting an integrated approach to exploit the potential of natural products in drug discovery development and translational research, which have a prerequisite of bench to bedside approach. The work could guide researchers toward innovative approaches for the ever-evolving field of anticancer drug discovery., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objectives: This study examined COVID-19's impact in the 2020 compared to 2019 survey years on preventive medical care utilization., Research Design: Using a cross-sectional sample of adults aged 18 years and over (2019; n = 31,997; 2020; n = 31,568), from the National Health Interview Survey, multivariable models compared 2020 to 2019 survey years for receiving diabetes screening blood tests, well-care visits, and physical therapy. An additional multivariable model predicted not having medical care due to the COVID-19 pandemic in the 2020 2020 survey year., Results: In the 2020 versus 2019 survey years, the likelihood lowered for receiving a blood test for diabetes screening (aOR .83 CI = .76, .90). There was a lowered likelihood for a well care visits (aOR = .98 CI = .84, 1.1) and physical therapy (aOR = .97 CI = .89, 1.0). Black (aOR = .62 CI = .51, .75), Hispanic (aOR = .62 CI = .51, .75) and Asian (aOR .67 CI = .53, .86) adults had a lowered likelihood of having physical therapy compared to White adults. Having no insurance coverage lowered the likelihood of getting all three indicators of preventive medical care. There was a higher likelihood of not getting medical care due to COVID-19 in the 2020 survey year (aOR = 1.7 CI = 1.3, 2.1) with Medicaid compared to private coverage., Conclusions: Use of preventive medical care lowered in the pandemic. Race and ethnicity and not having any coverage contributed to not receiving preventive care. Medicaid appeared to increase utilization of preventive medical care but not acute medical care., (© 2023. W. Montague Cobb-NMA Health Institute.)

Severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Though previous coronaviruses have caused substantial epidemics in recent years, effective therapies remained limited at the start of the Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic. The emergence and rapid spread throughout the globe of the novel SARS-CoV-2 virus necessitated a rapid development of therapeutics. Given the multitude of therapies that have emerged over the last two years and the evolution of data surrounding the efficacy of these therapies, we aim to provide an update on the major clinical trials that influenced clinical utilization of various COVID-19 therapeutics. This review focuses on currently used therapies in the United States and discusses the molecular mechanisms by which these therapies target the SARS-CoV-2 virus or the COVID-19 disease process. PubMed and EMBASE were used to find trials assessing the efficacy of various COVID-19 therapies. The keywords SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, and the names of the various therapies included in this review were searched in different combinations to find large-scale randomized controlled trials performed since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Multiple therapeutic options are currently approved for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 and prevention of severe disease in high-risk individuals in both in the inpatient and outpatient settings. In severe disease, a combination of antiviral and immunomodulatory treatments is currently recommended for treatment. Additionally, anti-viral agents have shown promise in preventing severe disease and hospitalization for those in the outpatient setting. More recently, current therapeutic approaches are directed toward early treatment with monoclonal antibodies directed against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Despite this, no treatment to date serves as a definitive cure and vaccines against the SARS-CoV-2 virus remain our best defense to prevent further morbidity and mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The US FDA has approved a limited number of treatments for alcohol, nicotine and opioid dependence; however, no treatments for other abused drugs such as marijuana, cocaine or methamphetamine are approved. This review focuses on research into drug pharmacotherapies, particularly single-drug therapies, for substance abuse and dependence contributing to the most important dual substance use disorders (SUDs). Given the implications of poly-substance abuse, it is essential that clinicians and researchers be aware of potential pharmacotherapies for the treatment of dual SUDs. A substantial number of patients abuse more than one drug concurrently, complicating the treatment of SUD and leaving clinicians with few FDA-approved drug options for their patients. In this era of evidence-based medicine, such patients are typically treated with therapeutically proven medications, but in ways that are outside the scope of a drug's original indication by the FDA. Such ‘off-label’ prescribing has become an important therapeutic strategy for practitioners seeking treatments for other diseases in subpopulations such as paediatrics and gerontology or for medical conditions such as oncology or mental illness. Similarly, the information that most clinicians use to make their decisions for treating patients abusing multiple drugs stems from trials treating a single SUD, anecdotal experiences from their own practice or that of their colleagues, or single-case studies reported in the literature. The existing evidence suggests there are few treatments for SUDs that confer significant reductions in substance use across a broad patient population. Moreover, even fewer clinical efficacy trials have been conducted that provide evidence of therapeutic benefit for these drugs. Recognising the difficulty in making the proper drug choice for facilitating maximum treatment success, this review highlights the single drugs or drug combinations that show some potential for treating dual SUDs. This review finds strongest support for the use of disulfiram for treatment of alcohol and cocaine dependence (with or without concomitant methadone maintenance), baclofen for alcohol and cocaine dependence (but not opioid-dependent cocaine users), tiagabine for cocaine dependence in methadone-maintained patients, and topiramate for alcohol, nicotine and cocaine dependence. While ondansetron and olanzapine show some efficacy in treating alcohol and cocaine dependence, more research is needed to better delineate the subpopulation in which these drugs may provide their maximum effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]