| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Gunst, Jesper D., et al.
(författare)
-
Efficacy of the TMPRSS2 inhibitor camostat mesilate in patients hospitalized with Covid-19-a double-blind randomized controlled trial
- 2021
-
Ingår i: eClinicalMedicine. - : Elsevier. - 2589-5370. ; 35
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The trans-membrane protease serine 2 (TMPRSS2) is essential for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) cell entry and infection. Efficacy and safety of TMPRSS2 inhibitors in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) have not been evaluated in randomized trials.Methods: We conducted an investigator-initiated, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled multicenter trial in patients hospitalized with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection from April 4, to December 31, 2020. Within 48 h of admission, participants were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive the TMPRSS2 inhibitor camostat mesilate 200 mg three times daily for 5 days or placebo. The primary outcome was time to discharge or clinical improvement measured as ≥2 points improvement on a 7-point ordinal scale. Other outcomes included 30-day mortality, safety and change in oropharyngeal viral load. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04321096. EudraCT Number: 2020-001,200-42.Findings: 137 patients were assigned to receive camostat mesilate and 68 to placebo. Median time to clinical improvement was 5 days (interquartile range [IQR], 3 to 7) in the camostat group and 5 days (IQR, 2 to 10) in the placebo group (P = 0·31). The hazard ratio for 30-day mortality in the camostat compared with the placebo group was 0·82 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0·24 to 2·79; P = 0·75). The frequency of adverse events was similar in the two groups. Median change in viral load from baseline to day 5 in the camostat group was -0·22 log10 copies/mL (p <0·05) and -0·82 log10 in the placebo group (P <0·05).Interpretation: Under this protocol, camostat mesilate treatment was not associated with increased adverse events during hospitalization for Covid-19 and did not affect time to clinical improvement, progression to ICU admission or mortality.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Nyholm, Tufve, et al.
(författare)
-
A national approach for automated collection of standardized and population-based radiation therapy data in Sweden
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Radiotherapy and Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0167-8140 .- 1879-0887. ; 119:2, s. 344-350
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose: To develop an infrastructure for structured and automated collection of interoperable radiation therapy (RT) data into a national clinical quality registry. Materials and methods: The present study was initiated in 2012 with the participation of seven of the 15 hospital departments delivering RT in Sweden. A national RT nomenclature and a database for structured unified storage of RT data at each site (Medical Information Quality Archive, MIQA) have been developed. Aggregated data from the MIQA databases are sent to a national RT registry located on the same IT platform (INCA) as the national clinical cancer registries. Results: The suggested naming convention has to date been integrated into the clinical workflow at 12 of 15 sites, and MIQA is installed at six of these. Involvement of the remaining 3/15 RT departments is ongoing, and they are expected to be part of the infrastructure by 2016. RT data collection from ARIA (R), Mosaiq (R), Eclipse (TM), and Oncentra (R) is supported. Manual curation of RT-structure information is needed for approximately 10% of target volumes, but rarely for normal tissue structures, demonstrating a good compliance to the RT nomenclature. Aggregated dose/volume descriptors are calculated based on the information in MIQA and sent to INCA using a dedicated service (MIQA2INCA). Correct linkage of data for each patient to the clinical cancer registries on the INCA platform is assured by the unique Swedish personal identity number. Conclusions: An infrastructure for structured and automated prospective collection of syntactically inter operable RT data into a national clinical quality registry for RT data is under implementation. Future developments include adapting MIQA to other treatment modalities (e.g. proton therapy and brachytherapy) and finding strategies to harmonize structure delineations. How the RT registry should comply with domain-specific ontologies such as the Radiation Oncology Ontology (ROO) is under discussion.
|
|
