Background World Health Organization expert groups recommended mortality trials of four repurposed antiviral drugs — remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir, and interferon beta-1a — in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). Methods We randomly assigned inpatients with Covid-19 equally between one of the trial drug regimens that was locally available and open control (up to five options, four active and the local standard of care). The intention-to-treat primary analyses examined in-hospital mortality in the four pairwise comparisons of each trial drug and its control (drug available but patient assigned to the same care without that drug). Rate ratios for death were calculated with stratification according to age and status regarding mechanical ventilation at trial entry. Results At 405 hospitals in 30 countries, 11,330 adults underwent randomization; 2750 were assigned to receive remdesivir, 954 to hydroxychloroquine, 1411 to lopinavir (without interferon), 2063 to interferon (including 651 to interferon plus lopinavir), and 4088 to no trial drug. Adherence was 94 to 96% midway through treatment, with 2 to 6% crossover. In total, 1253 deaths were reported (median day of death, day 8; interquartile range, 4 to 14). The Kaplan–Meier 28-day mortality was 11.8% (39.0% if the patient was already receiving ventilation at randomization and 9.5% otherwise). Death occurred in 301 of 2743 patients receiving remdesivir and in 303 of 2708 receiving its control (rate ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 1.11; P=0.50), in 104 of 947 patients receiving hydroxychloroquine and in 84 of 906 receiving its control (rate ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.59; P=0.23), in 148 of 1399 patients receiving lopinavir and in 146 of 1372 receiving its control (rate ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.25; P=0.97), and in 243 of 2050 patients receiving interferon and in 216 of 2050 receiving its control (rate ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.39; P=0.11). No drug definitely reduced mortality, overall or in any subgroup, or reduced initiation of ventilation or hospitalization duration. Conclusions These remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir, and interferon regimens had little or no effect on hospitalized patients with Covid-19, as indicated by overall mortality, initiation of ventilation, and duration of hospital stay. (Funded by the World Health Organization; ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN83971151 ; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04315948 .)

Intravenous immunoglobulin for treating sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock.

Bloodstream infections caused by Candida species are of increasing importance and associated with significant mortality. We performed a multi-centre prospective observational study to identify the species and antifungal susceptibilities of invasive bloodstream isolates of Candida species in the Asia-Pacific region. The study was carried out over a two year period, involving 13 centers from Brunei, Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam. Identification of Candida species was performed at each study center, and reconfirmed at a central laboratory. Susceptibility testing was performed using a commercial broth dilution panel (Sensititre YeastOne YST-010, Thermofisher, United Kingdom) with susceptibility categorisation (S = susceptible, S-DD = susceptible dose-dependent) applied using breakpoints from the Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute. Eight hundred and sixty-one Candida isolates were included in the study. The most common species were C. albicans (35.9%), C. tropicalis (30.7%), C. parapsilosis (15.7%), and C. glabrata (13.6%). Non-albicans species exceeded C. albicans species in centers from all countries except Taiwan. Fluconazole susceptibility was almost universal for C. albicans (S = 99.7%) but lower for C. tropicalis (S = 75.8%, S-DD = 6.1%), C. glabrata (S-DD = 94.9%), and C. parapsilosis (S = 94.8%). Echinocandins demonstrated high rates of in vitro susceptibility (S>99%) against C. albicans, C. tropicalis, and C. parapsilosis This study demonstrates that non-albicans species are the most common isolates from bloodstream infections in most countries in the Asia-Pacific region, with C. tropicalis as the predominant species. Because of the prevalence of reduced susceptibility to fluconazole in non-albicans species, the study indicates that echinocandins should be the antifungal of choice in clinically unstable or high-risk patients with documented candidemia.

No abstract

BackgroundPeople with active tuberculosis (TB) require six months of treatment. Some people find it difficult to complete treatment, and there are several approaches to help ensure completion. One such system relies on reminders, where the health system prompts patients to attend for appointments on time, or re-engages people who have missed or defaulted on a scheduled appointment.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of reminder systems on improving attendance at TB diagnosis, prophylaxis, and treatment clinic appointments, and their effects on TB treatment outcomes.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, Cochrane Effective Practice andOrganization of Care Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL,MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, CINAHL, SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI, m RCT, and the Indian Journal of Tuberculosis without language restriction up to 29 August 2014. We also checked reference lists and contacted researchers working in the field.Selection criteriaRandomized controlled trials (RCTs), including cluster RCTs and quasi-RCTs, and controlled before-and-after studies comparing reminder systems with no reminders or an alternative reminder system for people with scheduled appointments for TB diagnosis, prophylaxis, or treatment.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the included trials. We compared the effects of interventions by using risk ratios (RR) and presented RRs with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Also we assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach.Main resultsNine trials, including 4654 participants, met our inclusion criteria. Five trials evaluated appointment reminders for people on treatment for active TB, two for people on prophylaxis for latent TB, and four for people undergoing TB screening using skin tests.We classified the interventions into 'pre-appointment' reminders (telephone calls or letters prior to a scheduled appointment) or'default' reminders (telephone calls, letters, or home visits to people who had missed an appointment).For people being treated for active TB, clinic attendance and TB treatment completion were higher in people receiving pre-appointment reminder phone-calls (clinic attendance: 66% versus 50%; RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.59, one trial (USA), 615 participants, low quality evidence; TB treatment completion: 100% versus 88%; RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.27, one trial (Thailand), 92 participants, low quality evidence). Clinic attendance and TB treatment completion were also higher with default reminders (letters or home visits) (clinic attendance: 52% versus 10%; RR 5.04, 95% CI 1.61 to 15.78, one trial (India), 52 participants, low quality evidence; treatment completion: RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.24, two trials (Iraq and India), 680 participants, moderate quality evidence).For people on TB prophylaxis, clinic attendance was higher with a policy of pre-appointment phone-calls (63% versus 48%; RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.59, one trial (USA), 536 participants); and attendance at ...

Background Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat COVID-19 and is under investigation in numerous randomized clinical trials, but results are publicly available only for a small number of trials. The objective of this study was to assess the benefits of convalescent plasma treatment compared to placebo or no treatment and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GEHFX). Methods In this collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis, clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), the Cochrane COVID-19 register, the LOVE database, and PubMed were searched until April 8, 2021. Investigators of trials registered by March 1, 2021, without published results were contacted via email. Eligible were ongoing, discontinued and completed randomized clinical trials that compared convalescent plasma with placebo or no treatment in COVID-19 patients, regardless of setting or treatment schedule. Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung–Knapp–Sidik–Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. Results A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients). Risk of bias was low for 29/33 trials. Of 8495 patients who received convalescent plasma, 1997 died (23%), and of 7982 control patients, 1952 died (24%). The combined risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.92; 1.02) with between-study heterogeneity not beyond chance (I2 = 0%). The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis. Conclusions Convalescent plasma treatment of patients with COVID-19 did not reduce all-cause mortality. These results provide strong evidence that convalescent plasma treatment for patients with COVID-19 should not be used outside of randomized trials. Evidence synthesis from collaborations among trial investigators can inform both evidence generation and evidence application in patient care.

ObjectivesThe objective of this study is to assess the value for money of introducing pneumococcal conjugate vaccines as part of the immunization program in a lower-middle income country, the Philippines, which is not eligible for GAVI support and lower vaccine prices. It also includes the newest clinical evidence evaluating the efficacy of PCV10, which is lacking in other previous studies.MethodsA cost-utility analysis was conducted. A Markov simulation model was constructed to examine the costs and consequences of PCV10 and PCV13 against the current scenario of no PCV vaccination for a lifetime horizon. A health system perspective was employed to explore different funding schemes, which include universal or partial vaccination coverage subsidized by the government. Results were presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in Philippine peso (Php) per QALY gained (1 USD = 44.20 Php). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed to determine the impact of parameter uncertainty.ResultsWith universal vaccination at a cost per dose of Php 624 for PCV10 and Php 700 for PCV13, both PCVs are cost-effective compared to no vaccination given the ceiling threshold of Php 120,000 per QALY gained, yielding ICERs of Php 68,182 and Php 54,510 for PCV10 and PCV13, respectively. Partial vaccination of 25% of the birth cohort resulted in significantly higher ICER values (Php 112,640 for PCV10 and Php 84,654 for PCV13) due to loss of herd protection. The budget impact analysis reveals that universal vaccination would cost Php 3.87 billion to 4.34 billion per annual, or 1.6 to 1.8 times the budget of the current national vaccination program.ConclusionThe inclusion of PCV in the national immunization program is recommended. PCV13 achieved better value for money compared to PCV10. However, the affordability and sustainability of PCV implementation over the long-term should be considered by decision makers.

Background: The current evidence on the use of probiotics in treating atopic dermatitis is inconclusive. This study determined the comparative effectiveness of the different types of probiotic strains in treating pediatric atopic dermatitis. Methodology: Systematic and manual search for all randomized controlled trials available from inception until January 31, 2020, was done. Two independent authors conducted the search, screening, appraisal, and data abstraction. Network metaanalysis was conducted using STATA 14 software. Results: Twenty-two studies involving 28 different probiotic strains were included. The top three ranked probiotic strains in terms of efficacy are Mix1 (Bifidobacterium animalis subsp lactis CECT 8145, Bifidobacterium longum CECT 7347, and Lactobacillus casei CECT 9104); Lactobacillus casei DN-114001; and Mix6 (Bifidobacterium bifidum, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus casei, and Lactobacillus salivarius). Compared with placebo, Mix1 reduces atopic dermatitis symptoms with high certainty evidence (SMD −1.94, 95% CI −2.65 to −1.24; 47 participants). Mix6 compared with placebo probably reduces atopic dermatitis symptoms based on moderate certainty evidence (SMD −0.85, 95% CI −1.50 to −0.20; 40 participants). Lactobacillus casei DN-114001 compared with placebo may reduce atopic dermatitis symptoms based on low certainty evidence (SMD −1.35, 95% CI −2.04 to −0.65). In terms of safety, the highest