Current medical research and opinion
-
Aripiprazole 2-month ready-to-use (Ari 2MRTU) is a long-acting injectable antipsychotic that was approved for use in Europe in March 2024, for the maintenance treatment of schizophrenia in adult patients stabilized with aripiprazole; it is administered via gluteal intramuscular injection once every two months. This review examines population pharmacokinetic model-based simulations relevant to the use of Ari 2MRTU in Europe, accompanied by expert commentary that contextualizes the simulations and highlights the potential implications of the availability of Ari 2MRTU for patients, caregivers, and clinicians. Various simulations conducted across 8 weeks (representing the first dosing interval), or 32 weeks (representing maintenance dosing) demonstrated an aripiprazole exposure profile for Ari 2MRTU that was similar to aripiprazole once-monthly (AOM), but with an extended dosing interval. ⋯ Therapeutic levels of aripiprazole were also observed for treatment maintenance scenarios, except when dosing of Ari 2MRTU was delayed by 8 weeks. The availability of Ari 2MRTU extends the range of options for the maintenance treatment of schizophrenia in Europe. Ari 2MRTU may provide adherence benefits due to its extended dosing interval and the option to initiate treatment using a two-injection start regimen, which does not require 14 days of overlapping oral supplementation.
-
This paper reviews the scientific evidence on new anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies for treating Alzheimer's disease as a case study for improving scientific evidence communication. We introduce five guidelines condensed from the biomedical evidence literature but adapted to the short format of science communication in e.g. journal opinion pieces and newspaper articles. Given the major importance and recent confusion regarding the discussed drugs, with certain disagreements seen e.g. between FDA and EMA, the suggested guidelines may be useful to clinicians discussing with their patients and to scientists communicating the evidence in balance. More generally, we hope that the guidelines may help us to improve communication of scientific evidence on complex topics in opinion pieces in the scientific literature, in advocacy, and in media appearances.
-
The GLP-1 receptor-based agonists (GLP-1RAs) and SGLT2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) are major twenty first century breakthroughs in diabetes and obesity medicine but there are important safety considerations regarding the perioperative and periprocedural management of individuals who are treated with these agents. GLP-1RAs have been linked to an increased risk of retained gastric contents and pulmonary aspiration while SGLT2i can be associated with diabetic ketoacidosis. This manuscript provides a narrative review of the available evidence for perioperative and periprocedural risks in people prescribed GLP-1RAs and SGLT2i. The authors provide expert opinion-driven recommendations and algorithms on how to safely manage GLP-1RAs and SGLT2i under perioperative/periprocedural settings.
-
Peripheral Neuropathy (PN) can significantly impair quality of life, but often remains undiagnosed due to limited clinic time, lack of specialist expertise and lack of patient awareness. There are several validated questionnaires for diagnosing PN, but the time taken to administer them in busy primary care clinics limits their utilization. A new, simpler questionnaire was developed following an advisory board meeting in Southeast Asia and was further refined and translated to Portuguese and Spanish following a second advisory board meeting in Latin America. We consider current hurdles and propose a quick and reliable questionnaire that can be widely adopted to enable earlier diagnosis and improved management of PN in resource-limited settings in Latin America.
-
Review
Sting operations in biomedical publishing violate truthfulness and undermine trust in research.
Biomedical research cannot function without the trust of peers and society. The truthfulness of claims made by knowledge-producing agents, such as authors of research, is a prerequisite for their trustworthiness, and violations of truthfulness are rightly seen as a threat to the existence and validity of such research. While most reflection on the lack of truthfulness has focused on fake research, little attention has been paid to how sting operations and hoaxes arguably pose an equally great risk to the ethical integrity of publishing. ⋯ From a deontological perspective, we also argue that the reliance on anonymity in sting operations makes them just as bad, if not worse, than fake research. We advocate for critical scholarship as an alternative to hoaxes and sting operations to expose fake research, in order to promote truthfulness rather than violate it. Finally, we argue that journalists reporting on sting operations should insist less on their entertainment and sensationalist value, and focus more on their unethical nature.