| 1. |
- Bouza, E, et al.
(author)
-
Overview of virus and cancer relationships. Position paper
- 2021
-
In: Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia. - : Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia. - 1988-9518. ; 34:6, s. 525-555
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The role of certain viruses in the etiology of some tumors is today indisputable, but there is a lack, however, of annoverview of the relationship between viruses and cancer with amultidisciplinary approach. For this reason, the Health Sciences Foundation has convened a group of professionals from different areas of knowledge to discuss the relationship between viruses and cancer, and the present document is the result of these deliberations. Although viruses cause only 10-15% of cancers, advances in oncology research are largely due to the work done during the last century on tumor viruses. The clearest cancer-inducing viruses are: HPV, HBV, HCV, EBV and, depending on the geographical area, HHV-8, HTLV-1 and HIV. HPVs, for example, are considered to be the causative agents of cervical carcinomas and, more recently, of a proportion of other cancers. Among the Herpes viruses, the association with the development of neoplasms is well established for EBV and HHV-8. Viruses can also be therapeutic agents in certain neoplasms and, thus, some oncolytic viruses with selective tropism for tumor cells have been approved for clinical use in humans. It is estimated that the prophylaxis or treatment of viral infections could prevent at least 1.5 million cancer deaths per year.
|
|
| 2. |
- van Prehn, Joffrey, et al.
(author)
-
European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases : 2021 update on the treatment guidance document for Clostridioides difficile infection in adults
- 2021
-
In: Clinical Microbiology and Infection. - : Elsevier. - 1198-743X .- 1469-0691. ; 27:Suppl. 2, s. S1-S21
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Scope: In 2009, the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) published the first treatment guidance document for Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). This document was updated in 2014. The growing literature on CDI antimicrobial treatment and novel treatment approaches, such as faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) and toxin-binding monoclonal antibodies, prompted the ESCMID study group on C. difficile (ESGCD) to update the 2014 treatment guidance document for CDI in adults.Methods and questions: Key questions on CDI treatment were formulated by the guideline committee and included: What is the best treatment for initial, severe, severe-complicated, refractory, recurrent and multiple recurrent CDI? What is the best treatment when no oral therapy is possible? Can prognostic factors identify patients at risk for severe and recurrent CDI and is there a place for CDI prophylaxis? Outcome measures for treatment strategy were: clinical cure, recurrence and sustained cure. For studies on surgical interventions and severe-complicated CDI the outcome was mortality. Appraisal of available literature and drafting of recommendations was performed by the guideline drafting group. The total body of evidence for the recommendations on CDI treatment consists of the literature described in the previous guidelines, supplemented with a systematic literature search on randomized clinical trials and observational studies from 2012 and onwards. The Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used to grade the strength of our recommendations and the quality of the evidence. The guideline committee was invited to comment on the recommendations. The guideline draft was sent to external experts and a patients' representative for review. Full ESCMID endorsement was obtained after a public consultation procedure.Recommendations: Important changes compared with previous guideline include but are not limited to: metronidazole is no longer recommended for treatment of CDI when fidaxomicin or vancomycin are available, fidaxomicin is the preferred agent for treatment of initial CDI and the first recurrence of CDI when available and feasible, FMT or bezlotoxumab in addition to standard of care antibiotics (SoC) are preferred for treatment of a second or further recurrence of CDI, bezlotoxumab in addition to SoC is recommended for the first recurrence of CDI when fidaxomicinwas used to manage the initial CDI episode, and bezlotoxumab is considered as an ancillary treatment to vancomycin for a CDI episode with high risk of recurrence when fidaxomicin is not available. Contrary to the previous guideline, in the current guideline emphasis is placed on risk for recurrence as a factor that determines treatment strategy for the individual patient, rather than the disease severity.
|
|
| 3. |
- Glas, Gerie J., et al.
(author)
-
Ventilation practices in burn patients-an international prospective observational cohort study
- 2021
-
In: BURNS & TRAUMA. - : Oxford University Press. - 2321-3868 .- 2321-3876. ; 9
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: It is unknown whether lung-protective ventilation is applied in burn patients and whether they benefit from it. This study aimed to determine ventilation practices in burn intensive care units (ICUs) and investigate the association between lung-protective ventilation and the number of ventilator-free days and alive at day 28 (VFD-28). Methods: This is an international prospective observational cohort study including adult burn patients requiring mechanical ventilation. Low tidal volume (V-T) was defined as V-T <= 8 mL/kg predicted body weight (PBW). Levels of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and maximum airway pressures were collected. The association between V-T and VFD-28 was analyzed using a competing risk model. Ventilation settings were presented for all patients, focusing on the first day of ventilation. We also compared ventilation settings between patients with and without inhalation trauma. Results: A total of 160 patients from 28 ICUs in 16 countries were included. Low V-T was used in 74% of patients, median V-T size was 7.3 [interquartile range (IQR) 6.2-8.3] mL/kg PBW and did not differ between patients with and without inhalation trauma (p= 0.58). Median VFD-28 was 17 (IQR 0-26), without a difference between ventilation with low or high V-T (p= 0.98). All patients were ventilated with PEEP levels >= 5 cmH(2)O; 80% of patients had maximum airway pressures <30 cmH(2)O. Conclusion: In this international cohort study we found that lung-protective ventilation is used in the majority of burn patients, irrespective of the presence of inhalation trauma. Use of low V-T was not associated with a reduction in VFD-28.
|
|
