1.
Efficacy and safety of Tocilizumab, plasmapheresis and their combination in severe COVID-19: A randomized clinical trial
Gholinataj Jelodar M, Rafieian S, Saghafi F, Hadad Zedegan N, Birjandi B, Rafieian S, Allah Dini A, Dehghanpour H, Khalaj F, Zare S, et al
International immunopharmacology. 2022;115:109623
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study sought to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of plasmapheresis, Tocilizumab, and Tocilizumab with plasmapheresis treatment on the removal of inflammatory cytokines and improvement clinically of patients with severe COVID-19 in Intensive Care Units (ICU) due to the association between increased cytokine release and the severity of COVID-19. METHODS This clinical trial study was conducted in three treatment arms in Iran. All patients received standard care and randomization into one of three treatment groups; Tocilizumab (TCZ) alone, plasmapheresis alone, or a combination of Tocilizumab and plasmapheresis. Demographics, clinical evaluation, oxygenation status, laboratory tests and imaging data were evaluated in the three groups and re-checked 48 h after the end of treatment trials. Primary outcomes were oxygenation status, the need for mechanical ventilation and the rate of death. RESULTS Ninety-four patients were included in the trial after meeting the eligibility requirements. Twenty-eight patients received Tocilizumab alone, 33 had plasmapheresis alone, and 33 received both Tocilizumab and plasmapheresis. Baseline characteristics did not differ between three groups that included demographic, clinical and laboratory parameters. Following therapy, there was no difference between the three groups for CRP, ferritin, d-dimer, IL-6, pro-calcitonin and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) (P > 0.05). While a significant reduction was found in CRP levels within each group (32.04 ± 42.43 to 17.40 ± 38.11, 51.28 ± 40.96 to 26.36 ± 33.07 and 41.20 ± 34.27 to 21.56 ± 24.96 in the tocilizumab, plasmapheresis, and combined group, respectively) (p < 0.05), procalcitonin levels were elevated significantly in the Tocilizumab group (0.28 ± 0.09 to 0.37 ± 0.11) (p < 0.05). Clinically there was no difference between the three groups following treatment for O(2) saturation levels with supplementary oxygen at discharge, endotracheal intubation rate, use of NIVPP, mortality, mean hospital and ICU length of stay (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION Study results showed that the reduction of serum inflammatory markers, the rate of intubation and therapeutic complications including death were no different between the three groups; however, CRP levels were significantly reduced in all three groups, indicating that the interventions reduced inflammation likely through a reduction in the cytokine storm, though clinical outcomes were unaffected.
2.
Evaluation of a biosimilar recombinant alpha epoetin in the management of anemia in hemodialysis patients
Beiraghdar F, Panahi Y, Einollahi B, Nemati E, Sahebkar A, Hassanzadeh A, Khosroshahi HT, Azar SA, Safa J, Hashemi SR, et al
Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal. 2015;23((5)):544-8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND The efficacy of human recombinant erythropoietins (rHuEPOs) in the treatment of anemia with different etiologies is proven. Development of biosimilar rHuEPO products with lower cost and wider availability is important for the care of anemic patients. OBJECTIVE The aim of the present study was to determine the bioequivalence and safety of a biosimilar rHuEPO (Pastopoitin()) and compare it with the innovator product Eprex(), as a standard rHuEPO. METHODS One hundred and seven anemic patients on stable hemodialysis were recruited to this randomized double-blind comparative trial and assigned to either subcutaneous Pastopoitin (n = 50) or Eprex (n = 57). Each study group received rHuEPO at a dose of 80-120 IU/kg/week in 2-3 divided doses for a period of 3 months. Hematologic parameters including Hemoglobin, hematocrit, RBC, EBC, platelet, MCV, MCH and MCHC were checked every 2 weeks. Blood iron, ferritin, TIBC, creatinine, BUN and electrolytes (Na, K, Ca and P) were evaluated monthly over the 3 months. RESULTS A significant increase in hemoglobin, hematocrit and RBC was observed by the end of study in both Pastopoitin and Eprex groups (p < 0.001). However, these factors were not significantly different between the groups, neither at baseline nor at the end of study (p > 0.05). Likewise, the groups were comparable regarding MCV, MCH, MCHC, iron, ferritin, TIBC, creatinine, BUN and electrolytes at baseline as well as at the end of trial. Adverse events were not serious and occurred with the same frequency in the study groups. CONCLUSION Pastopoitin showed comparable efficacy and safety profile with Eprex in anemic patients on hemodialysis. Hence, Pastopoitin may be considered as a rHuEPO with a lower cost and wider availability compared with the innovator product Eprex.