Adverse Events
Recently Published Documents


(FIVE YEARS 20661)



Selma Tosun ◽  
Hülya Ozkan Ozdemir ◽  
Esin Erdogan ◽  
Seniz Akcay ◽  
Murat Aysin ◽  

Franz Brinkmann ◽  
Ronny Hüttner ◽  
Philipp J. Mehner ◽  
Konrad Henkel ◽  
Georgi Paschew ◽  

Abstract Background Endoscopic and laparoscopic electrosurgical devices (ED) are of great importance in modern medicine but can cause adverse events such as tissue injuries and burns from residual heat. While laparoscopic tools are well investigated, detailed insights about the temperature profile of endoscopic knives are lacking. Our aim is to investigate the temperature and the residual heat of laparoscopic and endoscopic monopolar instruments to increase the safety in handling ED. Methods An infrared camera was used to measure the temperature of laparoscopic and endoscopic instruments during energy application and to determine the cooling time to below 50 °C at a porcine stomach. Different power levels and cutting intervals were studied to investigate their impact on the temperature profile. Results During activation, the laparoscopic hook exceeded 120 °C regularly for an up to 10 mm shaft length. With regards to endoknives, only the Dual Tip Knife showed a shaft temperature of above 50 °C. The residual heat of the laparoscopic hook remained above 50 °C for at least 15 s after activation. Endoknives cooled to below 50 °C in 4 s. A higher power level and longer cutting duration significantly increased the shaft temperature and prolonged the cooling time (p < 0.001). Conclusion Residual heat and maximum temperature during energy application depend strongly on the chosen effect and cutting duration. To avoid potential injuries, the user should not touch any tissue with the laparoscopic hook for at least 15 s and with the endoknives for at least 4 s after energy application. As the shaft also heats up to over 120 °C, the user should be careful to avoid tissue contact during activation with the shaft. These results should be strongly considered for safety reasons when handling monopolar ED.

BMC Cancer ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Luai S. Al Rabadi ◽  
Madeline M. Cook ◽  
Andy J. Kaempf ◽  
Megan M. Saraceni ◽  
Michael A. Savin ◽  

Abstract Background Docetaxel in combination with two HER2-directed therapies, trastuzumab and pertuzumab, is the current standard frontline therapy for patients with metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer. Ado-trastuzumab (T-DM1), an antibody-drug conjugate of trastuzumab and a cytotoxic microtubule-inhibitory agent, emtansine, is approved in patients that have progressed with prior trastuzumab-based therapy. However, the benefit of T-DM1 in patients previously treated with pertuzumab therapy for metastatic breast cancer remains unclear. Methods We identified thirty-three adults with metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer treated between March 2013 and July 2018 with T-DM1 either as subsequent therapy after progression on a pertuzumab-based regimen (i.e., “pertuzumab-pretreated”) or without prior exposure to pertuzumab (i.e., “pertuzumab-naïve”). Collected data included patient demographics, treatment history, adverse events, and clinical outcomes. For both cohorts receiving T-DM1, the primary endpoint was PFS and secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR), and T-DM1-related toxicity rate. Results Pertuzumab-pretreated patients (n = 23, with 21 evaluable for T-DM1 efficacy) had a median PFS of 9.5 months (95% CI: 2.9–NA), 1-year OS rate of 67.4% (95% CI: 50.0–90.9%) with an unreached median, ORR of 14.3% (95% CI: 3.0–36.3%), and CBR of 52.4% (95% CI: 29.8–74.3%), with none of these measures being statistically different than those estimated for the pertuzumab-naïve group (n = 10). Treatment with T-DM1 after prior pertuzumab exposure (median T-DM1 duration 2.9 months) resulted in no grade ≥ 3 adverse events. Conclusions In our cohort, prior exposure to pertuzumab did not significantly impact T-DM1’s clinical efficacy or safety profile as second- or later-line therapy in patients with metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer.

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Haohao Lu ◽  
Chuansheng Zheng ◽  
Bin Liang ◽  
Bin Xiong

Abstract Background To investigate the safety and efficacy of 8Spheres in partial splenic embolization. To explore the possibility of accurate control of splenic embolic volume by quantifying the number of microspheres used during PSE. Method The data of 179 patients who underwent PSE were collected. The patients were divided into two groups: 300–500 um microsphere group (N = 83) and 500–700 um microsphere group (N = 96). The spleen volume before PSE, infarct volume and infarct rate of the spleen after PSE, changes in peripheral blood cells after PSE, postoperative adverse events and incidence of infection were compared between the two groups. Results 300–500 um group vs 500–700 um group: postoperative spleen volume (cm3): 753.82 ± 325.41 vs 568.65 ± 298.16 (P = 0.008); spleen embolization volume (cm3): 525.93 ± 118.29 vs 630.26 ± 109.71 (P = 0.014); spleen embolization rate: 41.1 ± 12.3% vs 52.4 ± 10.1% (P = 0.021). Leukocytes and platelets were significantly increased after PSE in both groups; leukocyte, 1 month: 4.13 ± 0.91 vs 5.08 ± 1.16 (P = 0.026); 3 months: 4.08 ± 1.25 vs 4.83 ± 0.98 (P = 0.022); platelet, 1 month: 125.6 ± 20.3 vs 138.7 ± 18.4 (P = 0.019); 3 months: 121.8 ± 16.9 vs 134.3 ± 20.1 (P = 0.017). Incidence of abdominal pain after PSE, 72 (86.7%) vs 69 (71.9%), P = 0.027. The incidence of other adverse events and infections after PSE was not statistically different. Conclusion PSE with 8Spheres is safe and effective. The use of 500–700 um microsphere for PSE can make the increase of peripheral blood cells more stable. Each vial of 8Spheres corresponds to a certain volume of splenic embolization, so it is possible to achieve quantitative embolization in PSE.

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Quentin Giordan ◽  
Julia Salleron ◽  
Catherine Vallance ◽  
Clothilde Moriana ◽  
Christelle Clement-Duchene

BackgroundThe use of antibiotics (ATB) and proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) alters the composition and diversity of the gut microbiota, which can influence the immune system, consequently interfering with response to anti-PD1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). We assessed the impact of ATB and/or PPI use on the efficacy and safety of ICI.MethodsTwo hundred twelve patients treated with anti-PD1 ICI for non-small cell lung carcinoma, melanoma, upper airway &amp; digestive tract carcinoma or renal cell carcinoma were retrospectively included. Patients having received ATB within 60 days before ICI initiation were included in the ATB+ group. Patients having received PPI within 30 days before ICI initiation were included in the PPI+ group. Four groups were thus considered: ATB-/PPI-, ATB+/PPI-, ATB-/PPI+, ATB+/PPI+. Response rate was assessed by RECIST v1.1. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events, recorded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 5, were compared using inverse probability of treatment weighting to account for selection bias.ResultsPFS at 6 months was 56.7 %, 95%CI (49.6%; 63.2%) and 47.2 %, 95%CI (39.8%;54.1%) at 12 months. OS was 81.6%, 95%CI (75.6%; 86.2%) at 6 months, and 69.4%, 95%CI (61.9%;75.7%) at 12 months. Compared to ATB-/PPI- group, PFS was lower for the ATB+/PPI- group [Hazard ratio (HR) 1.90, 95%CI (1.41;2.57)] and the ATB-/PPI+ group [HR 1.51, 95%CI (1.11;2.05)], and lowest in the ATB+/PPI+ group [HR 3.65, 95%CI (2.75;4.84)]. For OS, the use of ATB alone or PPI alone or in combination was a risk factor for death, with each increasing HR values by a similar magnitude, and the combination of ATB and PPI did not increase risk further. AEs were observed in 78 cases (36.8%) with no significant impact of ATB or PPI use.ConclusionsThis study reveals that ATB and/or PPI use can alter response to anti-PD1 ICI, and the prognosis of cancer patients. The microbiota mechanisms involved in the response to ICI should be investigated to optimize patient management.

2021 ◽  
Marian S. McDonagh ◽  
Jesse Wagner ◽  
Azrah Y. Ahmed ◽  
Rongwei Fu ◽  
Benjamin Morasco ◽  

Objectives. To evaluate the evidence on benefits and harms of cannabinoids and similar plant-based compounds to treat chronic pain. Data sources. Ovid® MEDLINE®, PsycINFO®, Embase®, the Cochrane Library, and SCOPUS® databases, reference lists of included studies, submissions received after Federal Register request were searched to July 2021. Review methods. Using dual review, we screened search results for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies of patients with chronic pain evaluating cannabis, kratom, and similar compounds with any comparison group and at least 1 month of treatment or followup. Dual review was used to abstract study data, assess study-level risk of bias, and rate the strength of evidence. Prioritized outcomes included pain, overall function, and adverse events. We grouped studies that assessed tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and/or cannabidiol (CBD) based on their THC to CBD ratio and categorized them as high-THC to CBD ratio, comparable THC to CBD ratio, and low-THC to CBD ratio. We also grouped studies by whether the product was a whole-plant product (cannabis), cannabinoids extracted or purified from a whole plant, or synthetic. We conducted meta-analyses using the profile likelihood random effects model and assessed between-study heterogeneity using Cochran’s Q statistic chi square and the I2 test for inconsistency. Magnitude of benefit was categorized into no effect or small, moderate, and large effects. Results. From 2,850 abstracts, 20 RCTs (N=1,776) and 7 observational studies (N=13,095) assessing different cannabinoids were included; none of kratom. Studies were primarily short term, and 75 percent enrolled patients with a variety of neuropathic pain. Comparators were primarily placebo or usual care. The strength of evidence (SOE) was low, unless otherwise noted. Compared with placebo, comparable THC to CBD ratio oral spray was associated with a small benefit in change in pain severity (7 RCTs, N=632, 0 to10 scale, mean difference [MD] −0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.95 to −0.19, I2=28%; SOE: moderate) and overall function (6 RCTs, N=616, 0 to 10 scale, MD −0.42, 95% CI −0.73 to −0.16, I2=24%). There was no effect on study withdrawals due to adverse events. There was a large increased risk of dizziness and sedation and a moderate increased risk of nausea (dizziness: 6 RCTs, N=866, 30% vs. 8%, relative risk [RR] 3.57, 95% CI 2.42 to 5.60, I2=0%; sedation: 6 RCTs, N=866, 22% vs. 16%, RR 5.04, 95% CI 2.10 to 11.89, I2=0%; and nausea: 6 RCTs, N=866, 13% vs. 7.5%, RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.78, I2=0%). Synthetic products with high-THC to CBD ratios were associated with a moderate improvement in pain severity, a moderate increase in sedation, and a large increase in nausea (pain: 6 RCTs, N=390 to 10 scale, MD −1.15, 95% CI −1.99 to −0.54, I2=39%; sedation: 3 RCTs, N=335, 19% vs. 10%, RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.03 to 4.63, I2=0%; nausea: 2 RCTs, N=302, 12% vs. 6%, RR 2.19, 95% CI 0.77 to 5.39; I²=0%). We found moderate SOE for a large increased risk of dizziness (2 RCTs, 32% vs. 11%, RR 2.74, 95% CI 1.47 to 6.86, I2=0%). Extracted whole-plant products with high-THC to CBD ratios (oral) were associated with a large increased risk of study withdrawal due to adverse events (1 RCT, 13.9% vs. 5.7%, RR 3.12, 95% CI 1.54 to 6.33) and dizziness (1 RCT, 62.2% vs. 7.5%, RR 8.34, 95% CI 4.53 to 15.34). We observed a moderate improvement in pain severity when combining all studies of high-THC to CBD ratio (8 RCTs, N=684, MD −1.25, 95% CI −2.09 to −0.71, I2=50%; SOE: moderate). Evidence on whole-plant cannabis, topical CBD, low-THC to CBD, other cannabinoids, comparisons with active products, and impact on use of opioids was insufficient to draw conclusions. Other important harms (psychosis, cannabis use disorder, and cognitive effects) were not reported. Conclusions. Low to moderate strength evidence suggests small to moderate improvements in pain (mostly neuropathic), and moderate to large increases in common adverse events (dizziness, sedation, nausea) and study withdrawal due to adverse events with high- and comparable THC to CBD ratio extracted cannabinoids and synthetic products in short-term treatment (1 to 6 months). Evidence for whole-plant cannabis, and other comparisons, outcomes, and PBCs were unavailable or insufficient to draw conclusions. Small sample sizes, lack of evidence for moderate and long-term use and other key outcomes, such as other adverse events and impact on use of opioids during treatment, indicate that more research is needed.

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Rong Tao ◽  
Lei Fan ◽  
Yongping Song ◽  
Yu Hu ◽  
Wei Zhang ◽  

AbstractThis study (ORIENT-4) aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of sintilimab, a humanized anti-PD-1 antibody, in patients with relapsed/refractory extranodal NK/T cell lymphoma (r/r ENKTL). ORIENT-4 is a multicenter, single-arm, phase 2 clinical trial (NCT03228836). Patients with r/r ENKTL who failed to at least one asparaginase-based regimen were enrolled to receive sintilimab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks for up to 24 months. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) based on Lugano 2014 criteria. Twenty-eight patients with r/r ENKTL were enrolled from August 31, 2017 to February 7, 2018. Twenty-one patients (75.0%, 95% CI: 55.1–89.3%) achieved an objective response. With a median follow-up of 30.4 months, the median overall survival (OS) was not reached. The 24-month OS rate was 78.6% (95% CI, 58.4–89.8%). Most treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were grade 1–2 (71.4%), and the most common TRAE was decreased lymphocyte count (42.9%). Serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred in 7 (25.0%) patients, and no patient died of adverse events. Sintilimab is effective and well tolerated in patients with r/r ENKTL and could be a novel therapeutic approach for the control of ENKTL in patients.

2021 ◽  
Raveendra KR ◽  
Chirag Rathod ◽  
Rahul Darnule ◽  
Subramanian Loganathan ◽  
Sarika Deodhar ◽  

Objective: To evaluate safety and efficacy of Itolizumab in hospitalized COVID-19 patients with PaO2/FiO2 ratio (PFR) ≤200 requiring oxygen therapy. Design: A multicentre, single-arm, Phase-4 study with a treatment period of 30-Days and an extended follow-up period of 90-Days. Methods: Hospitalized adult patients (n=300) with SARS-CoV-2 infection, with PFR ≤200, oxygen saturation ≤94% and ≥1 elevated inflammatory markers were included from 17 COVID-19 specific tertiary hospitals in India. Patients received Itolizumab infusion 1.6 mg/kg and were assessed for 1-month and then followed up to Day-90. Results: Day-30 post-treatment safety/efficacy results and Day-90 mortality results are presented. Primary outcome measures: incidence of severe acute infusion-related reactions (IRRs) (≥Grade-3) was 1.3% and mortality rate at 1-month was 6.7% (n=20/300). Key secondary analyses: Mortality rate at Day-90 was 8.0% (24/300). 91.7% patients came off the oxygen therapy within Day-30 of treatment. By Day-7, most patients had stable/improved SpO2 without increasing FiO2. Mean PFR improved by 50% by Day-7 (p<0.001) and the trend remained consistent till Day-30. Median time of recovery was 8 days. Cumulatively, at Day-30, 260(86.7%), 256(85.3%), 132(44.0%), 113(37.6%) and 32(10.7%) patients showed >1-point, >2-point, >3-point, >4-point and 5-point improvement on the modified COVID-19 8-point ordinal scale and worsening of symptoms by >1 point, >2 points and 3-points was seen in 26(8.7%), 20(6.7%) and 6(2.0%) patients, respectively. CRP, D-dimer, LDH and serum ferritin levels significantly decreased (p≤0.01) compared with baseline. IL-6 and TNFα levels also decreased 48-hours post-infusion. Overall, 123 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in 63 patients, most being Grades 1-3. Most common TEAEs were IRRs and lymphopenia; most common serious TEAEs were septic shock, worsening of ARDS and respiratory failure. No deaths were attributable to Itolizumab. Conclusion: Itolizumab shows no new safety concerns and suggests a mortality and recovery benefit at 1-month in hospitalized COVID-19 patients requiring oxygen therapy.

2021 ◽  
Juping Liu ◽  
Jie Hao ◽  
Ye Zhang ◽  
Kai Cao ◽  
Xiaorong Li ◽  

Abstract Background The sagittal abdominal diameter (SAD) is more precise than body mass index (BMI) for predicting adverse events in elderly. While physical function and BMI is related, the relationship is uncertain. BMI and gait speed (GS) is related and have a U-shaped distribution. The objective was to examine the relationship between GS and SAD in men and women aged 50 years and older. Methods This was a cross-sectional analysis. Data from the Handan Eye Study (HES), a Chinese prospective longitudinal study with participants randomly selected from the Yongnian county. Usual GS was measured over a 4 meters-track. SAD was categorized by interquartile: <18.0cm; 18.0-19.79cm; 19.8-21.89cm; ≥21.9cm. Unadjusted and adjusted analyses of covariance were performed to estimate the gender-specific means (and 95% CI) of GS (in m/s) according to SAD categories. Results The current analyses were performed in 2852 participants. Mean age was 56.16 years for women and 56.54 years for men. The unadjusted means of GS were 0.995 (95% CI 0.972-1.019) m/s in SAD Q1 participants, 0.991 (95% CI 0.968-1.014) m/s in SAD Q2, 0.986 (95% CI 0.964-1.007) m/s in SAD Q3 and 0.961 (95% CI 0.937-0.985) m/s in SAD Q4 individuals in women. The similar trend presented in men [Q1: 0.993 (95%CI 0.969-1.016) m/s; Q2: 0.980 (95%CI 0.956-1.004); Q3: 0.944 (95%CI 0.918-0.970); Q4: 0.948 (95%CI 0.923-0.973)]. After adjustment for age, the reported trends between GS and SAD in categories were largely confirmed in women, but not in men. Conclusions Age and gender should be considered when we explore the relationship between GS and SAD in elderly.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document