Background & aims The emergence of the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) which causes Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in a worldwide pandemic. SARS-CoV-2 is highly contagious and its severity highly variable. The fatality rate is unpredictable but is amplified by several factors including advancing age, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, hypertension and obesity. A large proportion of patients with these conditions are treated with lipid lowering medication and questions regarding the safety of continuing lipid-lowering medication in patients infected with COVID-19 have arisen. Some have suggested they may exacerbate their condition. It is important to consider known interactions with lipid-lowering agents and with specific therapies for COVID-19. This statement aims to collate current evidence surrounding the safety of lipid-lowering medications in patients, who have COVID-19. We offer a consensus view based on current knowledge and we rated the strength and level of evidence for these recommendations. Methods Pubmed, Google scholar and Web of Science were searched extensively for articles using search terms: SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, coronavirus, Lipids, Statin, Fibrates, Ezetimibe, PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies, nicotinic acid, bile acid sequestrate, nutraceuticals, red yeast rice, Omega-3-Fatty acids, Lomitapide, hypercholesterolaemia, dyslipidaemia and Volanesorsen. Results & Conclusions : There is no evidence currently that lipid lowering therapy is unsafe in patients with COVID-19 infection. Lipid-lowering therapy should not be interrupted because of the pandemic or in patients at increased risk of COVID-19 infection. In patients with confirmed COVID-19, care should be taken to avoid drug interactions, between lipid-lowering medications and drugs that may be used to treat COVID-19, especially in patients with abnormalities in liver function tests.

Many drug therapies are associated with prolongation of the QT interval. This may increase the risk of Torsades de Pointes (TdP), a potentially life-threatening cardiac arrhythmia. As the QT interval varies with a change in heart rate, various formulae can adjust for this, producing a ‘corrected QT’ (QTc) value. Normal QTc intervals are typically <450 ms for men and <460 ms for women. For every 10 ms increase, there is a ~5% increase in the risk of arrhythmic events. When prescribing drugs associated with QT prolongation, three key factors should be considered: patient-related risk factors (eg, female sex, age >65 years, uncorrected electrolyte disturbances); the potential risk and degree of QT prolongation associated with the proposed drug; and co-prescribed medicines that could increase the risk of QT prolongation. To support clinicians, who are likely to prescribe such medicines in their daily practice, we developed a simple algorithm to help guide clinical management in patients who are at risk of QT prolongation/TdP, those exposed to QT-prolonging medication or have QT prolongation.

BACKGROUNDDespite the revolutionary success of introducing tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), such as imatinib mesylate (IM), for treating chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), a substantial proportion of patients’ treatments fail.AIMThis study investigates the correlation between patient adherence and failure of TKIs’ treatment in a follow-up study.METHODSThis is a follow-up study of a new cohort of CML patients. Adherence to IM is assessed using the Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS 6 TrackCap, AARDEX Ltd). The 9-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale, medication possession ratio (MPR) calculation, and the electronic medical records are used for identifying potential factors that influence adherence. Clinical outcomes are assessed according to the European Leukemia Net 2013 guidelines via reverse transcriptase quantitative polymerase chain reaction measurement of the level of BCR-ABL1 transcripts in peripheral blood. Response is classified at the hematological, cytogenetic, and molecular levels into optimal, suboptimal, or failure.RESULTSA total of 36 CML patients (5 citizens and 31 noncitizen residents) consented to participate in the study. The overall mean MEMS score was 89. Of the 36 patients, 22 (61%) were classified as adherent (mean: 95) and 14 (39%) were classified as nonadherent (mean: 80.2). Adherent patients were significantly more likely to obtain optimal response (95%) compared to the nonadherent group (14.3%; P < 0.0001). The rate of poor adherence was as high as 39% using MEMS, which correlates with 37% treatment failure rate. The survey results show that 97% of patients increased the IM dose by themselves when they felt unwell and 31% of them took the missing IM dose when they remembered. Other factors known to influence adherence show that half of patients developed one or more side effects, 65% of patients experienced lack of funds, 13% of patients declared unavailability of the drug in the NCCCR pharmacy, and 72% of patients believed that IM would cure the disease. The MPR results reveal that 16% of patients had poor access to treatment through the hospital pharmacy.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONThis is the first prospective study to evaluate CML patients’ adherence and response to IM in Qatar. The high rate of treatment failure observed in Qatar is explained by poor adherence. An economic factor (unaffordable drug prices) is one of the main causes of nonadherence and efforts should be made locally to improve access to medication for cancer diseases. Other risk factors associated with poor adherence could be improved by close monitoring and dose adjustment. Monitoring risk factors for poor adherence and patient education that include direct communication between the health-care teams, doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and patients are essential components for maximizing the benefits of TKI therapy and could rectify this problem. The preliminary results show that patients’ response to treatment may be directly linked to patients’ adherence to treatment. However, further in-depth and specific analysis...