ObjectiveThe benefits of pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT) in chronic pancreatitis (CP) are inadequately defined. We have undertaken a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of PERT to determine the efficacy of PERT in exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI) from CP.DesignMajor databases were searched from 1966 to 2015 inclusive. The primary outcome was coefficient of fat absorption (CFA). Effects of PERT versus baseline and versus placebo, and of different doses, formulations and schedules were determined.ResultsA total of 17 studies (511 patients with CP) were included and assessed qualitatively (Jadad score). Quantitative data were synthesised from 14 studies. PERT improved CFA compared with baseline (83.7±6.0 vs 63.1±15.0, p<0.00001; I2=89%) and placebo (83.2±5.5 vs 67.4±7.0, p=0.0001; I2=86%). PERT improved coefficient of nitrogen absorption, reduced faecal fat excretion, faecal nitrogen excretion, faecal weight and abdominal pain, without significant adverse events. Follow-up studies demonstrated that PERT increased serum nutritional parameters, improved GI symptoms and quality of life without significant adverse events. High-dose or enteric-coated enzymes showed a trend to greater effectiveness than low-dose or non-coated comparisons, respectively. Subgroup, sensitive and meta-regression analyses revealed that sample size, CP diagnostic criteria, study design and enzyme dose contributed to heterogeneity; data on health inequalities were lacking.ConclusionsPERT is indicated to correct EPI and malnutrition in CP and may be improved by higher doses, enteric coating, administration during food and acid suppression. Further studies are required to determine optimal regimens, the impact of health inequalities and long-term effects on nutrition.

BackgroundThe availability of clinical and therapeutic data drawn from medical records and administrative databases has entailed new opportunities for clinical and epidemiologic research. However, these databases present inherent limitations which may render them prone to new biases. We aimed to conduct a structured review of biases specific to observational clinical studies based on secondary databases, and to propose strategies for the mitigation of those biases.MethodsScoping review of the scientific literature published during the period 2000–2018 through an automated search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science, supplemented with manually cross-checking of reference lists. We included opinion essays, methodological reviews, analyses or simulation studies, as well as letters to the editor or retractions, the principal objective of which was to highlight the existence of some type of bias in pharmacoepidemiologic studies using secondary databases.ResultsA total of 117 articles were included. An increasing trend in the number of publications concerning the potential limitations of secondary databases was observed over time and across medical research disciplines. Confounding was the most reported category of bias (63.2% of articles), followed by selection and measurement biases (47.0% and 46.2% respectively). Confounding by indication (32.5%), unmeasured/residual confounding (28.2%), outcome misclassification (28.2%) and “immortal time” bias (25.6%) were the subcategories most frequently mentioned.ConclusionsSuboptimal use of secondary databases in pharmacoepidemiologic studies has introduced biases in the studies, which may have led to erroneous conclusions. Methods to mitigate biases are available and must be considered in the design, analysis and interpretation phases of studies using these data sources.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12874-019-0695-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background We aimed to determine the impact of tocilizumab use on severe COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 19) pneumonia mortality. Methods We performed a multicentre retrospective cohort study in 18 tertiary hospitals in Spain from March to April 2020. Consecutive patients admitted with severe COVID-19 treated with tocilizumab were compared to patients not treated with tocilizumab, adjusting by inverse probability of the treatment weights (IPTW). Tocilizumab's effect in patients receiving steroids during the 48 h following inclusion was analysed. Results During the study period, 506 patients with severe COVID-19 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Among them, 268 were treated with tocilizumab and 238 patients were not. Median time to tocilizumab treatment from onset of symptoms was 11 days [interquartile range (IQR) 8–14]. Global mortality was 23.7%. Mortality was lower in patients treated with tocilizumab than in controls: 16.8% versus 31.5%, hazard ratio (HR) 0.514 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.355–0.744], p < 0.001; weighted HR 0.741 (95% CI 0.619–0.887), p = 0.001. Tocilizumab treatment reduced mortality by 14.7% relative to no tocilizumab treatment [relative risk reduction (RRR) 46.7%]. We calculated a number necessary to treat of 7. Among patients treated with steroids, mortality was lower in those treated with tocilizumab than in those treated with steroids alone [10.9% versus 40.2%, HR 0.511 (95% CI 0.352–0.741), p = 0.036; weighted HR 0.6 (95% CI 0.449–0.804), p < 0.001] (interaction p = 0.094). Conclusions These results show that survival of patients with severe COVID-19 is higher in those treated with tocilizumab than in those not treated and that tocilizumab's effect adds to that of steroids administered to non-intubated patients with COVID-19 during the first 48 h of presenting with respiratory failure despite oxygen therapy. Randomised controlled studies are needed to confirm these results. Trial registration European Union electronic Register of Post-Authorization Studies (EU PAS Register) identifier, EUPAS34415 Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s40121-020-00373-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of tocilizumab use for the treatment of active steroid-resistant Graves’ orbitopathy (GO). A retrospective longitudinal study was conducted by reviewing the medical records at a single center between November 2009 and December 2018. A total of 114 patients with steroid-resistant Graves’ orbitopathy were examined and treated with tocilizumab, of which 54 adults met the inclusion criteria. No concomitant medication for the treatment of orbitopathy was used. The main primary outcomes included changes from baseline in the Clinical Activity Score (CAS) and thyrotropin receptor antibody (TRAb) levels throughout therapy with tocilizumab. The absolute responses to treatment were defined as the achievement of CAS ≤ 1 and TRAb ≤ 10 U/L. A composite ophthalmic score including CAS, proptosis, eyelid retraction, and diplopia was used to evaluate individual improvement in GO. Adverse drug reactions were also assessed. Analysis of the patient’s CAS and TRAb levels showed meaningful reductions during tocilizumab treatment. Differences between values at baseline and subsequent time points were statistically significant (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). The absolute CAS response (CAS = 0 or 1) was achieved in 74% (37/50) of patients after the fourth dose of tocilizumab (at week 16), with a TRAb response being achieved in 55% (23/42) of patients. The relative CAS response (reduction ≥ 2 points) was achieved in 90.9% of patients (40/44) after the first dose of tocilizumab (at week 4). Measurements of proptosis (reduction ≥ 2 mm in 78% of patients, 42/54) and eyelid retraction (reduction ≥ 2 mm in 75%, 33/44), and the prevalence of diplopia (improvement in 68%, 19/28) were significantly reduced after the last dose of tocilizumab (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). GO improved in 98% (53/54) of patients when at least two criteria of the composite evaluation were required. Four patients exhibited disease recurrence, defined as an increase in CAS of ≥2 points in the six months following the date of inactivation. Most adverse drug reactions were mild or moderate in severity. In conclusion, our data suggest that a course of at least 4 months (one monthly dose) of tocilizumab therapy provides a significant benefit to patients with active moderate-to-severe steroid-resistant GO.