We aimed to systematically review evidence pertaining to the safety and efficacy of nitazoxanide in treating infectious diarrhea. On September 21, 2017, we identified relevant studies using 12 databases. The estimates of the included studies were pooled as a risk ratio (RR). We conducted a network and pairwise random-effects meta-analysis for both direct and indirect comparisons of different organisms that are known to cause diarrhea. The primary and secondary analysis outcomes were clinical response until cessation of illness, parasitological response and adverse events. We included 18 studies in our analysis. In cryptosporidiosis, the overall estimate favored nitazoxanide in its clinical response in comparison with placebo RR 1.46 [95% CI 1.22-1.74; P-value <0.0001]. Network meta-analysis among patients with Giardia intestinalis showed an increase in the probability of diarrheal cessation and parasitological responses in comparison with placebo, RR 1.69 [95% CI 1.08-2.64, P-score 0.27] and RR 2.91 [95% CI 1.72-4.91, P-score 0.55] respectively. In Clostridium difficile infection, the network meta-analysis revealed a non-significantly superior clinical response effect of nitazoxanide to metronidazole 31 days after treatment RR 1.21 [95% CI 0.87-1.69, P-score 0.26]. In Entamoeba histolytica, the overall estimate significantly favored nitazoxanide in parasitological response with placebo RR 1.80 [95% CI 1.35-2.40, P-value < 0.001]. We highlighted the effectiveness of nitazoxanide in the cessation of diarrhea caused by Cryptosporidium, Giardia intestinalis and Entamoeba histolytica infection. We also found significant superiority of NTZ to metronidazole in improving the clinical response to G. intestinalis, thus it may be a suitable candidate for treating infection-induced diarrhea. To prove the superiority of NTZ during a C. difficile infection may warrant a larger-scale clinical trial since its superiority was deemed insignificant. We recommend nitazoxanide as an appropriate option for treating infectious diarrhea.
A simple, rapid, specific and reliable high-performance liquid chromatographic assay of meloxicam in human plasma has been developed using a C18 reversed-phase analytical column. Reversed-phase chromatography was conducted using a mobile phase of 0.02 potassium dihydrogen phosphate (adjusted to pH 2.7 with phosphoric acid)-acetonitrile-triethylamine (35:65:0.05, v/v) with UV detection at 354 nm. The drug in human plasma was deproteinized using a combination of methanol and chloroform. This method is simple, rapid and consistent with a high recovery of meloxicam in human plasma ranging from 93.29 to 111.09%. Regression analysis for the calibration plot for plasma standards obtained for the drug concentrations between (25-4000) ng/mL indicated excellent linearity (r ≥ 0.9997). The proposed method was applied to study the bioequivalence between Mobic (original) and Melocam (generic) products. The study was conducted on using two tablets (4 × 7.5 mg) of each of the commercial product and the reference standard in a two-way open randomized crossover design involving 20 volunteers. Area under the concentration-time curve, peak concentration (C(max)) and time to reach C(max) were 72,868.61 ng h/mL, 2133.93 ng/mL and 4.06 h for Mobic, and 78,352.52 ng h/mL, 2525.18 ng/mL and 3.61 h for Melocam. Two C(max) were discovered in the pharmacokinetic profiles which confirm enterohepatic recirculation.
Various genetic polymorphisms have been reported to be associated with antipsychotic-induced weight gain. In this study, we aimed to determine whether risk polymorphisms in 12 candidate genes are associated with reduction in body mass index (BMI) of patients following switching of antipsychotics to aripiprazole or ziprasidone.
Warfarin care bundles (e.g. genotype-guided warfarin dosing, patient's self-testing [PST] or patient's self-management [PSM] and left atrial appendage closure) are based on the concept of combining several interventions to improve anticoagulation care. NOACs are also introduced for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (SPAF). However, these interventions have not been compared in head-to-head trials yet. We did a network meta-analysis based on a systematic review of randomized controlled trials comparing anticoagulant interventions for SPAF. Studies comparing these interventions in adults, whether administered alone or as care bundles were included in the analyses. The primary efficacy outcome was stroke and the primary safety outcome was major bleeding. Thirty-seven studies, involving 100,142 patients were assessed. Compared to usual care, PSM significantly reduced the risk of stroke (risk ratio [RR] 0.24, 95% CI 0.08-0.68). For major bleeding, edoxaban 60 mg (0.80, 0.71-0.90), edoxaban 30 mg (0.48, 0.42-0.56), and dabigatran 110 mg (0.81, 0.71-0.94) significantly reduced the risk of major bleeding compared with usual warfarin care. Cluster rank plot incorporating stroke and major bleeding outcomes indicates that some warfarin care bundles perform as well as NOACs. Both interventions are therefore viable options to be considered for SPAF. Additional studies including head-to-head trials and cost-effectiveness evaluation are still warranted.