Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in December 2019 and its rapid spread worldwide, the scientific community has been under pressure to react and make progress in the development of an effective treatment against the virus responsible for the disease. Here, we implement an original virtual screening (VS) protocol for repositioning approved drugs in order to predict which of them could inhibit the main protease of the virus (M-pro), a key target for antiviral drugs given its essential role in the virus\' replication. Two different libraries of approved drugs were docked against the structure of M-pro using Glide, FRED and AutoDock Vina, and only the equivalent high affinity binding modes predicted simultaneously by the three docking programs were considered to correspond to bioactive poses. In this way, we took advantage of the three sampling algorithms to generate hypothetic binding modes without relying on a single scoring function to rank the results. Seven possible SARS-CoV-2 M-pro inhibitors were predicted using this approach: Perampanel, Carprofen, Celecoxib, Alprazolam, Trovafloxacin, Sarafloxacin and ethyl biscoumacetate. Carprofen and Celecoxib have been selected by the COVID Moonshot initiative for in vitro testing; they show 3.97 and 11.90% M-pro inhibition at 50 µM, respectively.

Although well developed to assess efficacy questions, meta-analyses and, more generally, systematic reviews, have received less attention in application to safety-related questions. As a result, many open questions remain on how best to apply meta-analyses in the safety setting. This appraisal attempts to: (i) summarize the current guidelines for assessing individual studies, systematic reviews, and network meta-analyses; (ii) describe several publications on safety meta-analytic approaches; and (iii) present some of the questions and issues that arise with safety data. A number of gaps in the current quality guidelines are identified along with issues to consider when performing a safety meta-analysis. While some work is ongoing to provide guidance to improve the quality of safety meta-analyses, this review emphasizes the critical need for better reporting and increased transparency regarding safety data in the systematic review guidelines. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines for appropriate nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) utilisation focus on preventing NSAID-related gastrointestinal (GI), cardiovascular (CV), congestive heart failure (CHF) and renal adverse events. We compared concordance of NSAID prescriptions with clinical practice guideline recommendations in Quebec, pre and post rofecoxib withdrawal from market.
METHODS: Data were obtained from the Quebec Health Insurance Agency (RAMQ). All prescriptions for celecoxib and traditional NSAIDs (tNSAIDs) dispensed to patients ≥50 years of age were evaluated for concordance with clinical practice guidelines. Prescriptions were stratified by time period (pre and post rofecoxib withdrawal) and, GI, CV, CHF and renal risk factors at the dispensing date. Gastro-protective agent (GPA) co-prescriptions were also evaluated.
RESULTS: We assessed 1,966,793 celecoxib and 1,743,481 tNSAIDs prescriptions. Of celecoxib prescriptions, 87.2% and 86.5% were appropriate in the post- and pre-periods, respectively, compared to 72.6% and 70.1% of tNSAIDs prescriptions, respectively. In logistic regression, \'appropriateness\' of celecoxib prescriptions increased with age, rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis (OA), and was higher in the post- versus pre-period (odds ratio 1.22, 95% confidence interval 1.18-1.26); it was lower in women and in patients with higher income. \'Appropriateness\' of tNSAID prescriptions decreased in the post-period (0.92, 0.89-0.95), was lower in older persons and those with OA, and higher in women and in higher income patients. Of tNSAID prescriptions that should have received a GPA co-prescription, only 45.6% did.
CONCLUSIONS: Concordance with guideline recommendations increased for celecoxib and decreased for tNSAIDs after rofecoxib withdrawal; GPA co-prescription with tNSAIDs remained suboptimal.

暂无摘要。