Molnupiravir for Oral Treatment of Covid-19 in Nonhospitalized Patients.

Background: New treatments are needed to reduce the risk of progression of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). Molnupiravir is an oral, small-molecule antiviral prodrug that is active against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).

Methods: We conducted a phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of treatment with molnupiravir started within 5 days after the onset of signs or symptoms in nonhospitalized, unvaccinated adults with mild-to-moderate, laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 and at least one risk factor for severe Covid-19 illness.

A Randomized, Double-blind, Multicenter Trial Comparing Efficacy and Safety of Imipenem/Cilastatin/Relebactam Versus Piperacillin/Tazobactam in Adults With Hospital-acquired or Ventilator-associated Bacterial Pneumonia (RESTORE-IMI 2 Study).

Background: Imipenem combined with the β-lactamase inhibitor relebactam has broad antibacterial activity, including against carbapenem-resistant gram-negative pathogens. We evaluated efficacy and safety of imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam in treating hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP).

Methods: This was a randomized, controlled, double-blind phase 3 trial.

Efficacy of Bezlotoxumab in Participants Receiving Metronidazole, Vancomycin, or Fidaxomicin for Treatment of () Infection.

Background: In phase 3 MODIFY I/II trials, bezlotoxumab significantly reduced recurrence of () infection (rCDI) over 12 weeks. Choice of CDI antibacterial treatment may affect CDI-related outcomes; therefore, this prespecified analysis assessed if the magnitude of bezlotoxumab-induced rCDI reduction was influenced by the antibiotic administered.

Methods: In MODIFY I/II (NCT01241552/NCT01513239), participants received a single infusion of bezlotoxumab (10 mg/kg) or placebo during anti-CDI treatment.

Evaluation of Renal Safety Between Imipenem/Relebactam and Colistin Plus Imipenem in Patients With Imipenem-Nonsusceptible Bacterial Infections in the Randomized, Phase 3 RESTORE-IMI 1 Study.

Background: In the randomized controlled RESTORE-IMI 1 clinical trial (NCT02452047), imipenem/cilastatin (IMI) with relebactam (IMI/REL) was as effective as colistin plus IMI for the treatment of imipenem-nonsusceptible gram-negative infections. Differences in nephrotoxicity were observed between treatment arms. As there is no standard definition of nephrotoxicity used in clinical trials, we conducted analyses to further understand the renal safety profile of both treatments.

Comparison of Treatment Outcomes between Analysis Populations in the RESTORE-IMI 1 Phase 3 Trial of Imipenem-Cilastatin-Relebactam versus Colistin plus Imipenem-Cilastatin in Patients with Imipenem-Nonsusceptible Bacterial Infections.

The RESTORE-IMI 1 phase 3 trial demonstrated the efficacy and safety of imipenem-cilastatin (IMI) combined with relebactam (REL) for treating imipenem-nonsusceptible infections. The objective of this analysis was to compare the outcomes among patients meeting eligibility requirements based on central laboratory susceptibility versus local laboratory susceptibility. Patients with serious infections caused by imipenem-nonsusceptible, colistin-susceptible, and imipenem-REL-susceptible pathogens were randomized 2:1 to IMI-REL plus placebo or colistin plus IMI for 5 to 21 days.

RESTORE-IMI 1: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind Trial Comparing Efficacy and Safety of Imipenem/Relebactam vs Colistin Plus Imipenem in Patients With Imipenem-nonsusceptible Bacterial Infections.

Background: The β-lactamase inhibitor relebactam can restore imipenem activity against imipenem-nonsusceptible gram-negative pathogens. We evaluated imipenem/relebactam for treating imipenem-nonsusceptible infections.

Methods: Randomized, controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

Equalization of four cardiovascular risk algorithms after systematic recalibration: individual-participant meta-analysis of 86 prospective studies.

Aims: There is debate about the optimum algorithm for cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk estimation. We conducted head-to-head comparisons of four algorithms recommended by primary prevention guidelines, before and after 'recalibration', a method that adapts risk algorithms to take account of differences in the risk characteristics of the populations being studied.

Methods And Results: Using individual-participant data on 360 737 participants without CVD at baseline in 86 prospective studies from 22 countries, we compared the Framingham risk score (FRS), Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE), pooled cohort equations (PCE), and Reynolds risk score (RRS).

Use of Repeated Blood Pressure and Cholesterol Measurements to Improve Cardiovascular Disease Risk Prediction: An Individual-Participant-Data Meta-Analysis.

The added value of incorporating information from repeated blood pressure and cholesterol measurements to predict cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk has not been rigorously assessed. We used data on 191,445 adults from the Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration (38 cohorts from 17 countries with data encompassing 1962-2014) with more than 1 million measurements of systolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Over a median 12 years of follow-up, 21,170 CVD events occurred.

Bezlotoxumab for Prevention of Recurrent Clostridium difficile Infection.

Background: Clostridium difficile is the most common cause of infectious diarrhea in hospitalized patients. Recurrences are common after antibiotic therapy. Actoxumab and bezlotoxumab are human monoclonal antibodies against C.

C-reactive protein, fibrinogen, and cardiovascular disease prediction.

Background: There is debate about the value of assessing levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and other biomarkers of inflammation for the prediction of first cardiovascular events.

Methods: We analyzed data from 52 prospective studies that included 246,669 participants without a history of cardiovascular disease to investigate the value of adding CRP or fibrinogen levels to conventional risk factors for the prediction of cardiovascular risk. We calculated measures of discrimination and reclassification during follow-up and modeled the clinical implications of initiation of statin therapy after the assessment of CRP or fibrinogen.

Lipid-related markers and cardiovascular disease prediction.

Context: The value of assessing various emerging lipid-related markers for prediction of first cardiovascular events is debated.

Objective: To determine whether adding information on apolipoprotein B and apolipoprotein A-I, lipoprotein(a), or lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 to total cholesterol and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) improves cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk prediction.

Design, Setting, And Participants: Individual records were available for 165,544 participants without baseline CVD in 37 prospective cohorts (calendar years of recruitment: 1968-2007) with up to 15,126 incident fatal or nonfatal CVD outcomes (10,132 CHD and 4994 stroke outcomes) during a median follow-up of 10.

Frequency of myopathy in patients receiving lovastatin.

Lovastatin (Mevacor) 20 mg is being considered for nonprescription availability. Because the most severe untoward consequence of therapy with any statin is rhabdomyolysis, the clinical data for lovastatin pertaining to this adverse event were reviewed. Evidence to date, based on almost 2 decades of experience, points to an extremely low risk for myopathy and rhabdomyolysis associated with lovastatin.

A Consumer Use Study of Over-The-Counter lovastatin (CUSTOM).

The Consumer Use Study of OTC Mevacor evaluated the ability of subjects to self-manage high levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol by using a multifaceted cholesterol self-management program (the Mevacor Over-the-Counter Self-Management System; MOTC-SMS). This 26-week all-comers multicenter observational study was conducted in naturalistic storefront settings that used the fully functional MOTC-SMS to guide subjects' behavior. Of 3,316 subjects who evaluated the product (evaluators), 1,061 took >or=1 20-mg tablet of Mevacor OTC (users).

Effect of within-household reinfestation on design sensitivity.

The effect of within-household reinfestation on design sensitivity is investigated through statistical modeling of the reinfestation process. When reinfestation is present, household randomization tends to magnify treatment differences when compared with individual randomization or a randomized blocking design in the simple setting of two patients per household. The effect of reinfestation under more general household randomization settings is investigated by determining the relationship between the treatment effect and the number of patients per household.

Do you know your total cholesterol (TC) number?

Total cholesterol (TC) measurements are subject to errors primarily because of temporal variations in cholesterol levels within each individual. These errors make it difficult to estimate the proportion of study subjects with true (error-free) TC in a specific range, an extremely important parameter to policy makers in health care management. To properly address this issue, it is key to accurately estimate the distribution function of the true TC, which typically deviates from the normal distribution.

An observer-blinded study of 1% permethrin creme rinse with and without adjunctive combing in patients with head lice.

Objectives: To determine if NIX (Warner Lambert Healthcare, Morris Plains, NJ) 1% Permethrin Creme Rinse Lice Treatment (1% PLT) without combing will effectively treat >/=95% of patients on day 2 or on day 15; to determine whether combing influences efficacy.

Study Design: A randomized, observer-blinded study enrolled 95 infested adults and children. All patients were treated with 1% PLT on day 1 and, if still infested, on day 8.

Safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of escalating high doses of ivermectin in healthy adult subjects.

Safety and pharmacokinetics (PK) of the antiparasitic drug ivermectin, administered in higher and/or more frequent doses than currently approved for human use, were evaluated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose escalation study. Subjects (n = 68) were assigned to one of four panels (3:1, ivermectin/placebo): 30 or 60 mg (three times a week) or 90 or 120 mg (single dose). The 30 mg panel (range: 34 7-594 microg/kg) also received a single dose with food after a 1-week washout.