1
|
Khorashadizadeh S, Abbasifar S, Yousefi M, Fayedeh F, Moodi Ghalibaf A. The Role of Microbiome and Probiotics in Chemo-Radiotherapy-Induced Diarrhea: A Narrative Review of the Current Evidence. Cancer Rep (Hoboken) 2024; 7:e70029. [PMID: 39410854 PMCID: PMC11480522 DOI: 10.1002/cnr2.70029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/11/2023] [Revised: 08/28/2024] [Accepted: 09/13/2024] [Indexed: 10/20/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In this article, we review the most recent research on probiotics effects on diarrhea in both human and animal models of the condition along with the therapeutic potential of these compounds based on their findings. RECENT FINDINGS Nearly 50%-80% of cancer patients experience chemotherapy-induced diarrhea (CID), serious gastrointestinal toxicity of chemotherapeutic and radiation regimens that leads to prolonged hospitalizations, cardiovascular problems, electrolyte imbalances, disruptions in cancer treatment, poor cancer prognosis, and death. CID is typically categorized as osmotic diarrhea. The depletion of colonic crypts and villi by radiotherapy and chemotherapy agents interferes with the absorptive function of the intestine, thereby decreasing the absorption of chloride and releasing water into the intestinal lumen. Probiotic supplements have been found to be able to reverse the intestinal damage caused by chemo-radiation therapy by promoting the growth of crypt and villi and reducing inflammatory pathways. In addition, they support the modulation of immunological and angiogenesis responses in the gut as well as the metabolism of certain digestive enzymes by altering the gut microbiota. CONCLUSION Beyond the benefits of probiotics, additional clinical research is required to clarify the most effective strain combinations and dosages for preventing chemotherapy and radiotherapy diarrhea.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Sara Abbasifar
- Student Research CommitteeBirjand University of Medical SciencesBirjandIran
| | - Mohammad Yousefi
- Student Research CommitteeBirjand University of Medical SciencesBirjandIran
| | - Farzad Fayedeh
- Student Research CommitteeBirjand University of Medical SciencesBirjandIran
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Spacova I, Binda S, ter Haar JA, Henoud S, Legrain-Raspaud S, Dekker J, Espadaler-Mazo J, Langella P, Martín R, Pane M, Ouwehand AC. Comparing technology and regulatory landscape of probiotics as food, dietary supplements and live biotherapeutics. Front Microbiol 2023; 14:1272754. [PMID: 38188575 PMCID: PMC10770255 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1272754] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2023] [Accepted: 11/27/2023] [Indexed: 01/09/2024] Open
Abstract
Application of beneficial microorganisms as probiotics targets a broad range of intended uses, from maintaining health and supporting normal bodily functions to curing and preventing diseases. Currently, three main regulatory fields of probiotic products can be defined depending on their intended use: the more similar probiotic foods and probiotic dietary supplements, and live biotherapeutic products. However, it is not always straightforward to classify a probiotic product into one of these categories. The regulatory nuances of developing, manufacturing, investigating and applying each category of probiotic products are not universal, and not always apparent to those unfamiliar with the various global probiotic regulatory guidelines. Various global markets can be significantly different regarding legislation, possible claims, market value and quality requirements for the development and commercialization of probiotic products. Furthermore, different probiotic product categories are also linked with variable costs at different stages of product development. This review outlines the current landscape comparing probiotic foods, probiotic dietary supplements, and live biotherapeutics as probiotic products from a regulatory lens, focusing on product development, manufacturing and production, and clinical research agenda. The aim is to inform and promote a better understanding among stakeholders by outlining the expectations and performance for each probiotic product category, depending on their intended use and targeted geographical region.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Irina Spacova
- Research Group Environmental Ecology and Applied Microbiology, Department of Bioscience Engineering, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Sylvie Binda
- Rosell Institute for Microbiome and Probiotics, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | | | - Solange Henoud
- Rosell Institute for Microbiome and Probiotics, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | | | - James Dekker
- Fonterra Research and Development Centre Co., Ltd., Palmerston North, New Zealand
| | | | - Philippe Langella
- Université Paris-Saclay, INRAE, AgroParisTech, Micalis Institute, Jouy-en-Josas, France
| | - Rebeca Martín
- Université Paris-Saclay, INRAE, AgroParisTech, Micalis Institute, Jouy-en-Josas, France
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ribaldone DG, Pellicano R, Fagoonee S, Actis GC. Modulation of the gut microbiota: opportunities and regulatory aspects. Minerva Gastroenterol (Torino) 2023; 69:128-140. [PMID: 35179341 DOI: 10.23736/s2724-5985.22.03152-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
The human gut is an intensively colonized organ containing microorganisms that can be health-promoting or pathogenic. This feature led to the development of functional foods aiming to fortify the former category at the expense of the latter. Since long, cultured products, including probiotics fortification, have been used for humans as live microbial feed additions. This review presents some of the microbes used as probiotics and discusses how supplementation with probiotics may help initiate and/or restore eubiotic composition of gut microbiota. Additionally, it considers safety and regulatory aspects of probiotics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Sharmila Fagoonee
- Institute of Biostructures and Bioimaging (CNR) c/o Molecular Biotechnology Center, Turin, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Wu Z, Tian E, Chen Y, Dong Z, Peng Q. Gut microbiota and its roles in the pathogenesis and therapy of endocrine system diseases. Microbiol Res 2023; 268:127291. [PMID: 36542917 DOI: 10.1016/j.micres.2022.127291] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/08/2022] [Accepted: 12/15/2022] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
A new field of microbial research is the relationship between microorganisms and multicellular hosts. It is known that gut microbes can cause various endocrine system diseases, such as diabetes and thyroid disease. Changes in the composition or structure and the metabolites of gut microbes may cause gastrointestinal disorders, including ulcers or intestinal perforation and other inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. In recent years, reports on the interactions between intestinal microorganisms and endocrine system diseases have been increasingly documented. In the meantime, the treatment based on gut microbiome has also been paid much attention. For example, fecal microbiota transplantation is found to have a therapeutic effect on many diseases. As such, understanding the gut microbiota-endocrine system interactions is of great significance for the theranostic of endocrine system diseases. Herein, we summarize the relations of gut microbiome with endocrine system diseases, and discuss the potentials of regulating gut microbiome in treating those diseases. In addition, the concerns and possible solutions regarding the gut microbiome-based therapy are discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhuoxuan Wu
- State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China
| | - Erkang Tian
- Department of Orthodontics, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China
| | - Yuyang Chen
- State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China
| | - Zaiquan Dong
- Mental Health Center of West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
| | - Qiang Peng
- State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Lau VI, Xie F, Fowler RA, Rochwerg B, Johnstone J, Lauzier F, Marshall JC, Basmaji J, Henderson W, Khwaja K, Loubani O, Niven DJ, Zarychanski R, Arabi YM, Cartin-Ceba R, Thabane L, Heels-Ansdell D, Cook DJ. Health economic evaluation alongside the Probiotics to Prevent Severe Pneumonia and Endotracheal Colonization Trial (E-PROSPECT): a cost-effectiveness analysis. Can J Anaesth 2022; 69:1515-1526. [PMID: 36289153 DOI: 10.1007/s12630-022-02335-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2022] [Revised: 06/06/2022] [Accepted: 06/21/2022] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE We sought to compare the cost-effectiveness of probiotics and usual care with usual care without probiotics in mechanically ventilated, intensive care unit patients alongside the Probiotics to Prevent Severe Pneumonia and Endotracheal Colonization Trial (PROSPECT). METHODS We conducted a health economic evaluation alongside the PROSPECT randomized control trial (October 2013-March 2019). We adopted a public healthcare payer's perspective. Forty-four intensive care units in three countries (Canada/USA/Saudi Arabia) with adult critically ill, mechanically ventilated patients (N = 2,650) were included. Interventions were probiotics (Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG) vs placebo administered enterally twice daily. We collected healthcare resource use and estimated unit costs in 2019 United States dollars (USD) over a time horizon from randomization to hospital discharge/death. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) comparing probiotics vs usual care. The primary outcome was incremental cost per ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) event averted; secondary outcomes were costs per Clostridioides difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD), antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD), and mortality averted. Uncertainty was investigated using nonparametric bootstrapping and sensitivity analyses. RESULTS Mean (standard deviation [SD]) cost per patient was USD 66,914 (91,098) for patients randomized to probiotics, with a median [interquartile range (IQR)] of USD 42,947 [22,239 to 76,205]. By comparison, for those not receiving probiotics, mean (SD) cost per patient was USD 62,701 (78,676) (median [IQR], USD 41,102 [23,170 to 75,140]; incremental cost, USD 4,213; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2,269 to 10,708). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for VAP or AAD events averted, probiotics were dominated by usual care (more expensive, with similar effectiveness). The ICERs were USD 1,473,400 per CDAD event averted (95% CI, undefined) and USD 396,764 per death averted (95% CI, undefined). Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves reveal that probiotics were not cost-effective across wide ranges of plausible willingness-to-pay thresholds. Sensitivity analyses did not change the conclusions. CONCLUSIONS Probiotics for VAP prevention among critically ill patients were not cost-effective. Study registration data www. CLINICALTRIALS gov (NCT01782755); registered 4 February 2013.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vincent I Lau
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta and Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, AB, Canada. .,Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. .,Department of Critical Care, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, 8440 112 Street, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
| | - Feng Xie
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.,Programs for Health Economics and Outcomes Measures, Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Robert A Fowler
- Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Bram Rochwerg
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.,Division of Critical Care, Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Jennie Johnstone
- Department of Infection Prevention and Control, Sinai Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - François Lauzier
- Departments of Medicine, Anesthesiology & Critical Care, Université Laval, Quebec, QC, Canada
| | - John C Marshall
- Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - John Basmaji
- Division of Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Western University, London, ON, Canada
| | - William Henderson
- Division of Critical Care Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Kosar Khwaja
- Departments of Surgery and Critical Care Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Osama Loubani
- Department of Critical Care, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
| | - Daniel J Niven
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Ryan Zarychanski
- Sections of Critical Care and Hematology/Medical Oncology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada
| | - Yaseen M Arabi
- Intensive Care Department, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, Ministry of the National Guard Health Affairs, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Rodrigo Cartin-Ceba
- Division of Pulmonary Medicine and Critical Care, Department of Critical Care, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | - Lehana Thabane
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.,Biostatistics Unit, St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Diane Heels-Ansdell
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Deborah J Cook
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.,Division of Critical Care, Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Li HY, Wang HS, Wang YL, Wang J, Huo XC, Zhao Q. Management of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: Quality Assessment of Clinical Practice Guidelines and Variations in Recommendations on Drug Therapy for Prevention and Treatment. Front Pharmacol 2022; 13:903378. [PMID: 35668946 PMCID: PMC9163435 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.903378] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/24/2022] [Accepted: 04/29/2022] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose: To assess the quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) related to drug therapy for prevention and control of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and compare the differences and similarities between recommendations. Methods: Electronic databases (including PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase, Web of Science), guideline development organizations, and professional societies were searched to identify CPGs for VAP from 20 January 2012 to 20 January 2022. The Appraisal of Guidelines Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument was used to evaluate the quality of the guidelines. The recommendations on drug therapy for prevention and treatment for each guideline were extracted, and then a descriptive synthesis was performed to analyze the scope/topic, and consistency of the recommendations. Results: Thirteen CPGs were included. The median score and interquartile range (IQR) in each domain are shown below: scope and purpose 72.22% (63.89%,83.33%); stakeholder involvement 44.44% (38.89%,52.78%); rigor of development 43.75% (31.25%,57.29%); clarity and presentation 94.44% (77.78%,94.44%); applicability 20.83 (8.34%,33.34%) and editorial independence 50% (33.33%,66.67%). We extracted 21 recommendations on drug therapy for prevention of VAP and 51 recommendations on drugs used for treatment. Some controversies remained among the included guidelines. Conclusion: There is considerable variability in the development processes and reporting of VAP guidelines. Despite many similarities, the recommendations still had some inconsistencies in the details. For the prevention and treatment of VAP, local microbial epidemiology and antibiotic sensitivity must be considered, and recommendations should be regularly revised as new evidence emerges.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hong-Yan Li
- Department of Pharmacy, Qindao University Medical College Affiliated Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Yantai, China
| | - Hai-Shan Wang
- Department of Intensive Care Unit, Yantai YEDA Hospital, Yantai, China
| | - Ying-Lin Wang
- Department of Pharmacy, Qindao University Medical College Affiliated Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Yantai, China
| | - Jing Wang
- Department of Pharmacy, Qindao University Medical College Affiliated Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Yantai, China
| | - Xue-Chen Huo
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Qindao University Medical College Affiliated Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Yantai, China
- *Correspondence: Xue-Chen Huo, ; Quan Zhao,
| | - Quan Zhao
- Department of Pharmacy, Qindao University Medical College Affiliated Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Yantai, China
- *Correspondence: Xue-Chen Huo, ; Quan Zhao,
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Abstract
Viral infections represent a major health problem worldwide. Due to the wide variety of etiological agents and their increasing resistance to anti-virals and antibiotics treatments, new strategies for effective therapies need to be developed. Scientific evidence suggests that probiotics may have prophylactic and therapeutic effects in viral diseases. Indeed, these microorganisms interact harmoniously with the intestinal microbiota and protect the integrity of the intestinal barrier as well as modulate the host immune system. Currently, clinical trials with probiotics have been documented in respiratory tract infections, infections caused by human immunodeficiency viruses, herpes, human papillomavirus and hepatic encephalopathy. However, the benefits documented so far are difficult to extrapolate, due to the strain-dependent effect. In addition, the dose of the microorganism used as well as host characteristics are other parameters that should be consider when advocating the use of probiotics to treat viral infections. This review addresses the scientific evidence of the efficacy of probiotics in clinical strains perspective in viral infectious diseases in the last 10 years.
Collapse
|
8
|
Lau VI, Xie F, Basmaji J, Cook DJ, Fowler R, Kiflen M, Sirotich E, Iansavichene A, Bagshaw SM, Wilcox ME, Lamontagne F, Ferguson N, Rochwerg B. Health-Related Quality-of-Life and Cost Utility Analyses in Critical Care: A Systematic Review. Crit Care Med 2021; 49:575-588. [PMID: 33591013 DOI: 10.1097/ccm.0000000000004851] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Cost utility analyses compare the costs and health outcome of interventions, with a denominator of quality-adjusted life year, a generic health utility measure combining both quality and quantity of life. Cost utility analyses are difficult to compare when methods are not standardized. It is unclear how cost utility analyses are measured/reported in critical care and what methodologic challenges cost utility analyses pose in this setting. This may lead to differences precluding cost utility analyses comparisons. Therefore, we performed a systematic review of cost utility analyses conducted in critical care. Our objectives were to understand: 1) methodologic characteristics, 2) how health-related quality-of-life was measured/reported, and 3) what costs were reported/measured. DESIGN Systematic review. DATA SOURCES We systematically searched for cost utility analyses in critical care in MEDLINE, Embase, American College of Physicians Journal Club, CENTRAL, Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews' selected subset of archived versions of UK National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and American Economic Association electronic databases from inception to April 30, 2020. SETTING Adult ICUs. PATIENTS Adult critically ill patients. INTERVENTIONS None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Of 8,926 citations, 80 cost utility analyse studies were eligible. The time horizon most commonly reported was lifetime (59%). For health utility reporting, health-related quality-of-life was infrequently measured (29% reported), with only 5% of studies reporting baseline health-related quality-of-life. Indirect utility measures (generic, preference-based health utility measurement tools) were reported in 85% of studies (majority Euro-quality-of-life-5 Domains, 52%). Methods of estimating health-related quality-of-life were seldom used when the patient was incapacitated: imputation (19%), assigning fixed utilities for incapacitation (19%), and surrogates reporting on behalf of incapacitated patients (5%). For cost utility reporting transparency, separate incremental costs and quality-adjusted life years were both reported in only 76% of studies. Disaggregated quality-adjusted life years (reporting separate health utility and life years) were described in only 34% of studies. CONCLUSIONS We identified deficiencies which warrant recommendations (standardized measurement/reporting of resource use/unit costs/health-related quality-of-life/methodological preferences) for improved design, conduct, and reporting of future cost utility analyses in critical care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vincent I Lau
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, and Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, AB, Canada
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence & Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Feng Xie
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence & Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - John Basmaji
- Department of Medicine, Division of Critical Care Medicine, Western University, London, ON, Canada
| | - Deborah J Cook
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence & Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- Department of Medicine, Division of Critical Care Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Robert Fowler
- Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Department of Medicine, University Health Network, Ontario, ON, Canada
| | - Michel Kiflen
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence & Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- Population Health Research Institute, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Emily Sirotich
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence & Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | | | - Sean M Bagshaw
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, and Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | - M Elizabeth Wilcox
- Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Department of Medicine, University Health Network, Ontario, ON, Canada
| | - François Lamontagne
- Centre de Recherche du CHU de Sherbrooke, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada
| | - Niall Ferguson
- Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Department of Medicine, University Health Network, Ontario, ON, Canada
| | - Bram Rochwerg
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence & Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- Department of Medicine, Division of Critical Care Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Lau VI, Cook DJ, Fowler R, Rochwerg B, Johnstone J, Lauzier F, Marshall JC, Basmaji J, Heels-Ansdell D, Thabane L, Xie F. Economic evaluation alongside the Probiotics to Prevent Severe Pneumonia and Endotracheal Colonization Trial (E-PROSPECT): study protocol. BMJ Open 2020; 10:e036047. [PMID: 32595159 PMCID: PMC7322334 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-036047] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/21/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a common healthcare-associated infection in the intensive care unit (ICU). Probiotics are defined as live microorganisms that may confer health benefits when ingested. Prior randomised trials suggest that probiotics may prevent infections such as VAP and Clostridioides difficile-associated diarrhoea (CDAD). PROSPECT (Probiotics to Prevent Severe Pneumonia and Endotracheal Colonization Trial) is a multicentre, double-blinded, randomised controlled trial comparing the efficacy of the probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG with usual care versus usual care without probiotics in preventing VAP and other clinically important outcomes in critically ill patients admitted to the ICU. METHODS AND ANALYSIS The objective of E-PROSPECT is to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness of L. rhamnosus GG plus usual care versus usual care without probiotics in critically ill patients. E-PROSPECT will be performed from the public healthcare payer's perspective over a time horizon from ICU admission to hospital discharge.We will determine probabilities of in-ICU and in-hospital events from all patients alongside PROSPECT. We will retrieve unit costs for each resource use item using jurisdiction-specific public databases, supplemented by individual site unit costs if such databases are unavailable. Direct costs will include medications, personnel costs, radiology/laboratory testing, operative/non-operative procedures and per-day hospital 'hoteling' costs not otherwise encompassed. The primary outcome is the incremental cost per VAP prevented between the two treatment groups. Other clinical events such as CDAD, antibiotic-associated diarrhoea and in-hospital mortality will be included as secondary outcomes. We will perform pre-specified subgroup analyses (medical/surgical/trauma; age; frailty status; antibiotic use; prevalent vs no prevalent pneumonia) and probabilistic sensitivity analyses for VAP, then generate confidence intervals using the non-parametric bootstrapping approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION Study approval for E-PROSPECT was granted by the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board of McMaster University on 29 July 2019. Informed consent was obtained from the patient or substitute decision-maker in PROSPECT. The findings of this study will be published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT01782755; Pre-results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vincent Issac Lau
- Department of Critical Care, University of Alberta Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Deborah J Cook
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Division of Critical Care, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Robert Fowler
- Sunnybrook Health Sciences Institute, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Bram Rochwerg
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Division of Critical Care, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jennie Johnstone
- Public Health Ontario, University of Toronto Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - François Lauzier
- Population Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Unit (Trauma-Emergency-Critical Care Medicine), Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec, Quebec, Canada
| | - John C Marshall
- Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - John Basmaji
- Department of Medicine, Division of Critical Care, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada
| | - Diane Heels-Ansdell
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Lehana Thabane
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Feng Xie
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|