Displaying all 2 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications among hospitalized older adults with COVID-19 in Malaysian tertiary hospitals
    Chang CT, Mohd Shariff SM, Abu Bakar NS, Ramzuzzaman NS, Lim CK, Lim EYJ, et al.
    J Pharm Policy Pract, 2023 Jan 12;16(1):2.
    PMID: 36635766 DOI: 10.1186/s40545-022-00504-1
    INTRODUCTION: Older adults are among the most vulnerable groups during the COVID-19 epidemic, contributing to a large proportion of COVID-19-related death. Medication review and reconciliation by pharmacist can help reduce the number of potentially inappropriate medications but these services were halted during COVID-19.

    AIM: To assess the prevalence and factors associated with inappropriate medicine use among older populations with COVID-19.

    METHODS: This was a cross-sectional, retrospective analysis of medications among hospitalized older adults with COVID-19. Potentially inappropriate medication use was categorized using the Beer's and STOPP criteria.

    RESULTS: Combining both criteria, 181 (32.7%) of the 553 patients were identified to have used at least one or more potentially inappropriate medication. A marginally higher number of inappropriate medications was documented using the Beers 2019 criteria (151 PIM in 124 patients) compared to STOPP criteria (133 PIMS in 104 patients). The long-term use of proton pump inhibitors (n = 68; 12.3%) and drugs which increases the risk of postural hypotension were the most commonly reported PIM (n = 41; 7.4%). Potentially inappropriate medication use was associated with previous history of hospital admission in the past 12 months (Odds ratio [OR]: 2.27; 95% CI 1.29-3.99) and higher number of discharge medications.

    CONCLUSIONS: Nearly, one in three older adults with COVID-19 had been prescribed a PIM, and the proportion of older adults with polypharmacy increased after discharge. This highlights the importance of having clinical pharmacist conducting medication reviews to identify PIMs and ensure medication appropriateness.

  2. SIRveNIB: Selective Internal Radiation Therapy Versus Sorafenib in Asia-Pacific Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma
    Chow PKH, Gandhi M, Tan SB, Khin MW, Khasbazar A, Ong J, et al.
    J Clin Oncol, 2018 07 01;36(19):1913-1921.
    PMID: 29498924 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2017.76.0892
    Purpose Selective internal radiation therapy or radioembolization (RE) shows efficacy in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) limited to the liver. This study compared the safety and efficacy of RE and sorafenib in patients with locally advanced HCC. Patients and Methods SIRveNIB (selective internal radiation therapy v sorafenib), an open-label, investigator-initiated, phase III trial, compared yttrium-90 (90Y) resin microspheres RE with sorafenib 800 mg/d in patients with locally advanced HCC in a two-tailed study designed for superiority/detriment. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 and stratified by center and presence of portal vein thrombosis. Primary end point was overall survival (OS). Efficacy analyses were performed in the intention-to-treat population and safety analyses in the treated population. Results A total of 360 patients were randomly assigned (RE, 182; sorafenib, 178) from 11 countries in the Asia-Pacific region. In the RE and sorafenib groups, 28.6% and 9.0%, respectively, failed to receive assigned therapy without significant cross-over to either group. Median OS was 8.8 and 10.0 months with RE and sorafenib, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9 to 1.4; P = .36). A total of 1,468 treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were reported (RE, 437; sorafenib, 1,031). Significantly fewer patients in the RE than sorafenib group had grade ≥ 3 AEs (36 of 130 [27.7%]) v 82 of 162 [50.6%]; P < .001). The most common grade ≥ 3 AEs were ascites (five of 130 [3.8%] v four of 162 [2.5%] patients), abdominal pain (three [2.3%] v two [1.2%] patients), anemia (zero v four [2.5%] patients), and radiation hepatitis (two [1.5%] v zero [0%] patients). Fewer patients in the RE group (27 of 130 [20.8%]) than in the sorafenib group (57 of 162 [35.2%]) had serious AEs. Conclusion In patients with locally advanced HCC, OS did not differ significantly between RE and sorafenib. The improved toxicity profile of RE may inform treatment choice in selected patients.
Related Terms
    Try searching for something
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links