It would often be desirable to obtain the respiratory rate during everyday conditions without obtaining an additional respiratory trace. This study investigates the agreement between respiratory rate assessed from the electrocardiogram (ECG) and the reference respiratory rate derived from a nasal/oral airflow (AF). Nasal/oral airflow and a Holter ECG were recorded in 52 healthy subjects (26 males, age range: 25.4-85.4 years) during everyday conditions for at least 10 h, including night-time sleep. The respiratory rate was assessed for each 5-min epoch (1) using respiratory sinus arrhythmia (RSA), (2) utilizing the respiration induced variations of the R-wave amplitude (ECG derived respiration (EDR)). The agreement with respect to AF was quantified using the average/std and the concordance correlation coefficient rho(c). For RSA and EDR the difference with respect to AF was 0.2 cpm (std: 0.6 cpm) during sleep and -0.2 cpm (std: 1.0 cpm) during wake time. During sleep the RSA-approach performed best for subjects < or =50 years (rho(c) = 0.79) and worst for subjects >50 years (rho(c) = 0.41). The correlation of the EDR-approach was rho(c) = 0.73 for both groups. In conclusion, the respiratory rate may be assessed with reasonable agreement by both methods in younger subjects, but EDR should be preferred in the elderly.
Background. Traditional mistletoe therapy in cancer patients involves subcutaneous applications of Viscum album L. preparations, with doses slowly increasing based on patient responses. Intravenous infusion of high doses may improve therapeutic outcomes and is becoming more common. Little is known about the safety of this “off-label” application of mistletoe. Methods. An observational study was performed within the Network Oncology. Treatment with intravenous mistletoe applications is described. The frequency of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to intravenous mistletoe applications was calculated and compared to ADR data from a study on subcutaneous applications. Results. Of 475 cancer patients who received intravenous infusions of Helixor, Abnoba viscum, or Iscador mistletoe preparations, 22 patients (4.6%) reported 32 ADRs of mild (59.4%) or moderate severity (40.6%). No serious ADRs occurred. ADRs were more frequently reported to i.v. mistletoe administered alone (4.3%), versus prior to chemotherapy (1.6%). ADR frequency differed with respect to preparation type, with Iscador preparations showing a higher relative frequency, compared to Abnoba viscum and Helixor. Overall, patients were almost two times less likely to experience an ADR to intravenous compared to subcutaneous application of mistletoe. Conclusion. Intravenous mistletoe therapy was found to be safe and prospective studies for efficacy are recommended.
Combination strategies involving chemotherapy and monoclonal antibodies (mAb) are commonly used in attempts to produce better clinical outcomes. This practice has led to new and ongoing toxicities that may lead to reductions in dose or noncompliance, limiting the effectiveness of treatment. Viscum album L (VA) preparations are widely used in Europe as additive therapy and have been associated with reduced chemotherapy-related adverse reactions and increased health-related quality of life. Concomitant VA therapy might also reduce toxicity related to mAb. This retrospective study investigated the safety of combined treatment with VA and mAb in cancer patients. A total of 43 patients had combined therapy (474 exposures); 12 had VA without mAb (129 exposures), and 8 had mAb without VA (68 exposures). Most patients (89.3%) received concomitant chemotherapy or supportive therapies. A total of 34 patients (60.7%) experienced 142 adverse events (AEs). Leucopenia (14.1% of all events), acneiform rash (8.5%), and stomatitis (6.3%) occurred most frequently. Longitudinal logistic regression analysis suggested a nearly 5 times higher odds of experiencing an AE following treatment with mAb compared with mAb plus VA (95% CI = 1.53-16.14). Our results, together with theoretical consideration of potential botanical-drug interactions, suggest that combined treatment with VA and mAb is safe.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.