One hundred twenty-two chemotherapy-naive patients with histologically confirmed colorectal adenocarcinoma were entered into a randomized trial comparing infusional fluorouracil (FU) versus cisplatin (CDDP) and FU. In both groups, patients received continuous infusion FU 1,000 mg/m2/d for 5 consecutive days every 4 weeks. Patients randomized to CDDP/FU also received CDDP 20 mg/m2 intravenous (IV) bolus on days 1 to 5 of each cycle. Patients were comparable in terms of age, performance status, baseline laboratory values, dominant sites of measurable disease, and percent of liver involvement. The partial response rate was significantly greater in patients who received CDDP/FU versus FU alone (25% v 3%, P = .001). Patients who received CDDP/FU experienced significantly greater toxicity compared with FU alone: grades 3 and 4 hematologic toxicity occurred in 22% and 0% of patients, respectively (P = .0001); grades 2 to 4 nausea and vomiting occurred in 80% and 15% of patients, respectively (P = .0001). There were no significant differences in either the duration of response (median, 6 and 4.7 months for CDDP/FU and FU groups, respectively) or survival (median 10, and 12 months, respectively). Compared with infusional FU alone, CDDP/FU provided a significantly greater partial response rate with increased toxicity, but it did not improve overall survival in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma. Therefore, the use of CDDP/FU as routine therapy for the treatment of colorectal carcinoma cannot be recommended.

Background The role of androgens on COVID-19 is well established. Proxalutamide is a second-generation, non-steroidal antiandrogen (NSAA) with the highest antiandrogen potency among NSAAs and concurrent regulation of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) expression and inflammatory response. Proxalutamide has been demonstrated to be effective to prevent hospitalizations in early COVID-19 in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Conversely, in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, preliminary results from two different arms of an RCT (The Proxa-Rescue AndroCoV Trial) also demonstrated a reduction in all-cause mortality. This study aims to report the final, joint results of the two arms (North arm and South arm) of the Proxa-Rescue AndroCoV trial of the two arms (North and South arms) combined, and to evaluate whether COVID-19 response to proxalutamide was consistent across different regions (Northern Brazil and Southern Brazil). Materials and methods Upon randomization, hospitalized COVID-19 patients received either proxalutamide 300mg/day or placebo for 14 days, in addition to usual care, in a proxalutamide:placebo ratio of 1:1 in the North arm and 4:1 in the South arm (ratio was modified due to preliminary report of high drug efficacy). Datasets of the South and North arms were combined, and statistical analysis was performed for the overall study population. Proxalutamide was compared to placebo group for 14-day and 28-day recovery (discharge alive from the hospital) and mortality rates, and overall and post-randomization hospitalization stay. Results of proxalutamide and placebo groups were also compared between the North and South arms. Analysis was also performed stratified by sex and baseline WHO COVID Ordinary Score. Results A total of 778 subjects were included (645 from the North, 317 from the proxalutamide group and 328 from the placebo group; 133 from the South arm, 106 from the proxalutamide group and 27 from the placebo group). Recovery rate was 121% higher in proxalutamide than placebo group at day 14 [81.1% vs 36.6%; Recovery ratio (RecR) 2.21; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.92-2.56; p<0.0001], and 81% higher at day 28 (98.1% vs 47.6%; RecR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.61-2.03; p<0.0001). All-cause mortality rate was 80% lower in proxalutamide than placebo group at Day 14 [8.0% vs 39.2%; Risk ratio (RR), 0.20; 95% CI, 0.14-0.29; p<0.0001], and 78% lower at Day 28 (10.6% vs 48.2%; RR, 0.22; 95% CI 0.16-0.30). Post-randomization time-to-discharge was shorter in proxalutamide [median, 5 days; interquartile range (IQR), 3-8] than placebo group (median, 9 days; IQR, 6-14) (p<0.0001). Results were statistically similar between North and South arms for all measured outcomes. Males and females presented similar results in all outcomes. Patients that did not require oxygen use (scores 3 and 4) did not present statistically significant improvement in recovery and mortality rates, whereas scores 5 and 6 presented significant improvements in all outcomes (p<0.0001 ...

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infectivity is mediated by the androgen-promoted protease, transmembrane protease, serine 2 (TMPRSS2). Previously, we have shown that treatment with proxalutamide, a non-steroidal androgen receptor antagonist, accelerates viral clearance and clinical remission in outpatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) compared to placebo. The effects in hospitalized COVID-19 patients were unknown. Methods: Men and women hospitalized but not requiring mechanical ventilation were randomized (1:1 ratio) to receive 300 mg of proxalutamide per day or placebo for 14 days. The study was conducted at eight sites in the state of Amazonas, Brazil. The primary outcome measure was the clinical status (8-point ordinal scale) at 14-days post-randomization. The primary efficacy endpoint was the 14-day recovery ratio (alive hospital discharge [scores 1, 2]). Findings: A total of 645 patients were randomized (317 received proxalutamide, 328 placebo) and underwent intention-to-treat analysis. The 14-day median ordinal scale score in the proxalutamide group was 1 (interquartile range [IQR]=1-2) versus 7 (IQR=2-8) for placebo, P<0.001. The 14-day recovery rate was 81.4% for proxalutamide and 35.7% for placebo (recovery ratio, 2.28; 95% CI 1.95-2.66 [P<0.001]). The 28-day all-cause mortality rate was 11.0% for proxalutamide versus 49.4% for placebo (hazard ratio, 0.16; 95% CI 0.11-0.24). The median post-randomization time to recovery was 5 days (IQR=3-8) for proxalutamide versus 10 days (IQR=6-15) for placebo. Interpretation: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients not requiring mechanical ventilation receiving proxalutamide had a 128% higher recovery rate than those treated with placebo. All-cause mortality was reduced by 77.7% over 28 days. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04728802).

Dengue fever and chikungunya are viral diseases that have spread rapidly throughout the world in recent decades. The occurrence of complications is well known, including prerenal acute kidney injury (AKI), which is usually thought to be caused by dehydration and fluid loss. Thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) is an uncommon aggravation of dengue fever and chikungunya, with only a few cases described in the medical literature. The aim of this study is to present 3 cases of TMA associated with arboviral infection. Three patients with clinical history, laboratory test, and kidney biopsy results compatible with TMA were selected for the study, 2 of whom had a serological diagnosis of dengue fever and 1 of chikungunya. The 3 patients were followed up at the Federal University of Maranhão Hospital’s Nephrology Service in 2018. A targeted gene panel sequencing (TGPS) plus multiple to atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS) multiplex ligation–dependent probe amplification (MLPA) was performed in 2 of the patients and revealed in the patient 1 a heterozygous pathogenic variant in the gene THBD, as well as heterozygous deletions in CFH, CFHR1, and CFHR3. In the patient 2, there were heterozygous pathogenic variant in the genes CFI and CFB, in addition to heterozygous deletions in the genes CFHR1 and CFHR3. Both received treatment with eculizumab and undergone recovery of renal function. The third patient had TMA not classified as either aHUS or thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP); he abandoned the treatment and returned to the service after 2 years for a dialysis emergency. Patients with arboviral infectious disease and changes that suggest TMA should have appropriate support to establish early diagnosis and useful treatment.

Introduction: Proxalutamide, a second generation non-steroidal antiandrogen (NSAA), primarily developed for castration-resistant prostate cancer, demonstrated reduction in 28-day mortality rate of 77.7% in hospitalized COVID-19 patients in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-arm randomized clinical trial (RCT), through intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. However, the intriguingly high 28-day mortality rate of patients that did not complete the 14-day treatment with proxalutamide, compared non-completers of the placebo arm and overall placebo arm, raised the hypotheses of the existence of non-neglectable differences between ITT and on-treatment (OT) analysis in terms of drug efficacy. Despite the inherent limitations of OT analysis, we aimed to respond to unanswered questions regarding the drug efficacy when the 14-day treatment with proxalutamide was complete, and secondarily understand the causality relationship between treatment interruption and mortality rate. Methods: This is a post-hoc exploratory analysis of a double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled, prospective, multicentric, two-arm RCT of 300mg-daily 14-day proxalutamide therapy for hospitalized COVID-19 patients not requiring mechanical ventilation, using OT population, i.e., excluding patients that did not complete treatment or interrupted at least 24 hours before death. Patients above 18 years old with confirmed COVID-19 not presenting kidney, liver, or heart failure were eligible. The primary outcome was 8-point COVD-19 ordinal scale at day 14. Secondary outcomes included 28-day 8-point COVID-19 ordinary scale, 14-day and 28-day all-cause mortality rate, and median hospital length. Results: In total, 580 patients completed the 14-day treatment or died during treatment, including 288 patients in the proxalutamide arm and 292 patients in the placebo arm, with similar baseline characteristics between groups. The 28-day all-cause mortality rate was 4.2% in the proxalutamide group and 49.0% in the placebo group. The mortality risk ratio (RR) was 0.08 (95% CI, 0.05-0.15), with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 2.2 to prevent death. The median hospital length stay after randomization was 05 days (interquartile range - IQR = 3 to 7.2 days) in the proxalutamide group and 09 days (IQR = 6 to 15 days) in the placebo group (p < 0.001). The 28-day all-cause mortality rate of patients that received proxalutamide but interrupted treatment before 14 days was 79.3%, while those that received placebo and interrupted before 14 days was 52.8% (p = 0.054 between groups). Conclusion: The reduction in 28-day all-cause mortality rate with 14-day proxalutamide treatment for hospitalized COVID-19 patients was more significant treatment completers (92%), compared to the reduction when all patients enrolled in the proxalutamide arm were considered (77.7%). However, the magnitude of statistical significance of the reduction in all-cause mortality and the NNT were similar between the OT and ITT analysis. The apparent high mortality risk rate with early interruption of proxalutamide treatments suggests that strategies for treatment compliance should be reinforced for future RCTs with proxalutamide. (NCT04728802)