Brachytherapy: An emblematic example of extreme hypofractionated regimen

In order to provide more convenient irradiation regimens for patient comfort, radiation facility organization and health expenses, new hypofractionated protocols have been evaluated. Moderately (dose/fraction: 2.3 to 3 Gy), then ultra (dose/fraction: 5.2 to 6.1 Gy) hypofractionated irradiations were first validated. The current question is: is it possible to go forward using extreme hypofractionated regimens (EHR) based on 1 to 3 fractions. Different irradiation techniques are under investigation. However, brachytherapy remains the smartest way to deliver a high dose in a small volume. We report prospective and retrospective study results which evaluated EHR for breast and prostate brachytherapy. While oncological outcome and toxicity profile appear extremely encouraging for low-risk breast cancer after a 1 to 4 fractions (6.25 to 20 Gy/fraction), the use of a single fraction of 19 to 23 Gy appears debatable for prostate cancer. Brachytherapy represents an emblematic example of EHR but longer follow-up and more mature results are awaited in order to specify the right indications and refine the EQD2 calculation method including new biological and technical factors.     

Sofosbuvir-velpatasvir en pacientes mexicanos con hepatitis C: una revisión retrospectiva

IntroductionThe sofosbuvir-velpatasvir (SOF/VEL) combination is a direct-acting antiviral therapy that is authorized and available in Mexico, making the performance of a real-world multicenter study that evaluates the sustained virologic response at 12 weeks post-treatment a relevant undertaking.MethodsA retrospective review of the case records of 241 patients seen at 20 hospitals in Mexico was conducted to assess hepatitis C treatment with the SOF/VEL combination (n = 231) and the sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/ribavirin (SOF/VEL/RBV) combination (n = 10). The primary efficacy endpoint was the percentage of patients that achieved SVR at 12 weeks after the end of treatment.ResultsOverall SVR was 98.8% (95% CI 97.35-100%). Only three patients did not achieve SVR, two of whom had cirrhosis and a history of previous treatment with peg-IFN. Of the subgroups analyzed, all the patients with HIV coinfection, three patients with genotype 3, and the patients treated with the SOF/VEL/RBV combination achieved SVR. The subgroups with the lower success rates were patients that were treatment-experienced (96.8%) and patients with F1 fibrosis (95.5%). The most frequent adverse events were fatigue, headache, and insomnia. No serious adverse events were reported.ConclusionTreatments with SOF/VEL and SOF/VEL/RBV were highly safe and effective, results coinciding with those of other international real-world studies.     

Thrombosis and thromboembolism: Brighton collaboration case definition and guidelines for data collection,analysis, and presentation of immunization safety data

This is a Brighton Collaboration case definition of thrombosis and thromboembolism to be used in the evaluation of adverse events following immunization, and for epidemiologic studies for the assessment of background incidence or hypothesis testing. The case definition was developed by a group of experts convened by the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) in the context of active development of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. The case definition format of the Brighton Collaboration was followed to develop a consensus definition and defined levels of certainty, after an exhaustive review of the literature and expert consultation. The document underwent peer review by the Brighton Collaboration Network and by selected expert reviewers prior to submission.     

Glycaemic control for patients with severe acute brain injury: Protocol for a systematic review

Background

Hyperglycaemia is common in patients with acute brain injury admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). Many studies have found associations between development of hyperglycaemia and increased mortality in hospitalised patients. However, the optimal target for blood glucose control is unknown. We want to conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis to explore the beneficial and harmful effects of restrictive versus liberal glucose control on patient outcomes in adults with severe acute brain injury.

Methods

We will systematically search medical databases including CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE and trial registries. We will search the following websites for ongoing or unpublished trials: http://www.controlled-trials.com/ , http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ , www.eudraCT.com , http://centerwatch.com/ , The Cochrane Library's CENTRAL, PubMed, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded and CINAHL. Two authors will independently review and select trials and extract data. We will include randomised trials comparing levels of glucose control in our analyses and observational studies will be included to address potential harms. The primary outcomes are defined as all-cause mortality, functional outcome and health-related quality of life. Secondary outcomes include serious adverse events including hypoglycaemia, length of ICU stay and duration of mechanical ventilation, and explorative outcomes including intracranial pressure and infection. Trial Sequential Analysis will be used to investigate the risk of type I error due to repetitive testing and to further explore imprecision. Quality of trials will be evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and quality of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach.

Discussion

The results of the systematic review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication. With the review, we hope to inform future randomised clinical trials and improve clinical practice.