1.
Chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity: a new perspective on the role of Digoxin, ATG7 activators, Resveratrol, and herbal drugs.
Al-Hussaniy, HA, Alburghaif, AH, Alkhafaje, Z, Al-Zobaidy, MAJ, Alkuraishy, HM, Mostafa-Hedeab, G, Azam, F, Al-Samydai, AM, Al-Tameemi, ZS, Naji, MA
Journal of medicine and life. 2023;(4):491-500
Abstract
Cancer is a major public health problem, and chemotherapy plays a significant role in the management of neoplastic diseases. However, chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity is a serious side effect secondary to cardiac damage caused by antineoplastic's direct and indirect toxicity. Currently, there are no reliable and approved methods for preventing or treating chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity. Understanding the mechanisms of chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity may be vital to improving survival. The independent risk factors for developing cardiotoxicity must be considered to prevent myocardial damage without decreasing the therapeutic efficacy of cancer treatment. This systematic review aimed to identify and analyze the evidence on chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity, associated risk factors, and methods to decrease or prevent it. We conducted a comprehensive search on PubMed, Google Scholar, and Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) using the following keywords: "doxorubicin cardiotoxicity", "anthracycline cardiotoxicity", "chemotherapy", "digoxin decrease cardiotoxicity", "ATG7 activators", retrieving 59 articles fulfilling the inclusion criteria. Therapeutic schemes can be changed by choosing prolonged infusion application over boluses. In addition, some agents like Dexrazoxane can reduce chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity in high-risk groups. Recent research found that Digoxin, ATG7 activators, Resveratrol, and other medical substances or herbal compounds have a comparable effect on Dexrazoxane in anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity.
2.
Evidence for the Efficacy of a High Dose of Vitamin D on the Hyperinflammation State in Moderate-to-Severe COVID-19 Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Sarhan, N, Abou Warda, AE, Sarhan, RM, Boshra, MS, Mostafa-Hedeab, G, ALruwaili, BF, Ibrahim, HSG, Schaalan, MF, Fathy, S
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania). 2022;58(10)
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Vitamin D insufficiency is an example of the factors which may affect snowballed COVID-19 risk and mortality. The aim of this study was to determine whether the clinical results and prognoses of COVID-19 patients are enhanced by supplementing a high dose of vitamin D relative to the conventional low dose. This study is a randomised controlled trial of 116 patients. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the two groups i.e. 58 patients received treatment with low-dose vitamin D and 58 received treatment with high-dose vitamin D. Results show that the incidence of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit hospitalisation, death, sepsis, and atrial fibrillation in the high-dosage vitamin D group was considerably reduced compared to the low-dosage vitamin D group. However, the need for high oxygen was significantly higher in the high-dose vitamin D group compared to the low-dose group. Additionally, there was a significant difference in the monitored parameters before and after treatment in favour of the high-dose vitamin D group, which were significantly lower in the high-dose vitamin D group compared to the low-dose group. Authors conclude that the sooner micronutrients are administered to outpatients, the better the outcome, especially before supportive or specific treatment is commenced.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Vitamin D supplementation plays a key effect in lowering cytokine storms among COVID-19 patients by influencing the activity of the renin-angiotensin system and the production of the angiotensin-2 converting enzyme. The study was conducted to explore the effect of high-dose intramuscular vitamin D in hospitalized adults infected with moderate-to-severe SARS-CoV-2 in comparison with the standard of care in the COVID-19 protocol. Materials and Methods: Two groups of patients were compared in this prospective randomized controlled trial as the vitamin D was administered orally to group 1 (alfacalcidol 1 mcg/day) and intramuscularly to group 2 (cholecalciferol 200,000 IU). One hundred and sixteen participants were recruited in total, with fifty-eight patients in each group. Following the Egyptian Ministry of Health's policy for COVID-19 management, all patients received the same treatment for a minimum of five days. Results: A significant difference was recorded in the length of hospital stay (8.6 versus 6.8 days), need for high oxygen or non-invasive mechanical ventilator (67% versus 33%), need for a mechanical ventilator (25% versus 75%), clinical improvement (45% versus 55%), the occurrence of sepsis (35% versus 65%), and in the monitored laboratory parameters in favor of high-dose vitamin D. Moreover, clinical improvement was significantly associated with the need for low/high oxygen, an invasive/non-invasive mechanical ventilator (MV/NIMV), and diabetes, while mortality was associated with the need for MV, ICU admission, atrial fibrillation, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, and the occurrence of secondary infection. Conclusions: Our study showed that high-dose vitamin D was considered a promising treatment in the suppression of cytokine storms among COVID-19 patients and was associated with better clinical improvement and fewer adverse outcomes compared to low-dose vitamin D.
