Extracorporeal Treatment for Chloroquine, Hydroxychloroquine, and Quinine Poisoning: Systematic Review and Recommendations from the EXTRIP Workgroup

Antibacterial activities of phytochemical constituents from the leaves of Coula edulis (Olacaceae) and In silico investigations of ursolic acid

From the leaves of Coula edulis, fourteen compounds were isolated and identified: D-mannitol (1), a mixture of β-sitosterol (2) and stigmasterol (3), α-amyrin (4), betulin (5), lupeol (6), lupenone (7), betulinic acid (8), taraxerol (9), 3β-(E)-coumaroyltaraxerol (10), 3β-(Z)-coumaroyltaraxerol (11), ursolic acid (12), stigmasterol 3-O-β-D-glucoside (13), and β-sitosterol 3-O-β-D-glucoside (14). These compounds were analysed through NMR spectroscopy (both 1D and 2D) and by comparing them to previously published data. Compounds 1, 4, 5, and 7-9 have been identified from this species for the first time. Antibacterial activity was assessed, with compound 12 displaying the best efficacy against Staphylococcus aureus (MIC: 15.6 μg/mL). Molecular docking of compound 12 led to twenty lead compounds, among which 12 F displayed the highest score (-10.1 kcal/mol). Most lead compounds showed better scores compared to Vancomycin (-8.8 kcal/mol). Biovia Discovery Studio analysis reveals lead compounds interacting with CASTp-predicted active pocket amino acids.

Improved Malaria Therapy with Cationic Nanocapsules Demonstrated in Plasmodium berghei-Infected Rodents Using Whole Blood Surrogate Population PK/PD Modeling

Objectives: Investigating how nanoparticle systems interact in whole blood (WB) is critical to evaluating the effectiveness of malaria therapy. Methods: We decided to establish a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) model of the quinine population in WB using Plasmodium berghei-infected mice, with a subsequent model comparison for nanocapsules coated with polysorbate (NCP80) or prepared with Eudragit® RS (NCEUD). The WB quinine population pharmacokinetic model in rats was developed using plasma and partition coefficients for rat erythrocytes. Mouse WB quinine population PK/PD modeling was developed using allometrically scaled literature-free mouse quinine pharmacokinetic data and covariate values to obtain a WB population pharmacokinetic model for quinine and nanocapsules in mice. This allowed for PK/PD modeling of the quinine population with the WB concentration and parasitemia data in mice. All models were built in NONMEN. Results: The WB quinine concentration profiles in rats were characterized using a two-compartment model. Nanoencapsulation reduced clearance and central compartment volume and increased peripherical compartimental volume. A maximum effect model described the PK/PD of the quinine WB population in mice, demonstrating that NCEUD enhances the antimalarial effect. Conclusions: Quinine WB is a good surrogate for describing the response to exposure in malaria. NCEUD outperformed NCP80 and free quinine, suggesting that cationic surfaces improve the potential for treating malaria.

Metabolic management of accidental intoxication

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Unintentional intoxication comprises a major chunk of all intoxications. Most patients are in the pediatric age group with another set of patients being the elderly. Substances found to cause accidental intoxication vary from country to country and even within different regions of a country. Frequent reviews of current literature are needed to be abreast of trends.

RECENT FINDINGS

Prescription drugs and household chemicals are major culprits when it comes to accidental intoxication. Acetaminophen, digoxin and metformin are some of the prominent prescription drugs frequently associated with unintentional intoxications. Increasingly alcohol based hand sanitizers are becoming an important etiology of these events, following their increased usage during the COVID-19 pandemic. Pattern recognition to identify class of intoxicant and supportive care including prevention of further absorption and increased excretion are cornerstones of therapy. Antidote when available should be used promptly.

SUMMARY

Knowledge about current epidemiology of accidental intoxications, toxidrome pattern recognition and appropriate antidote usage beside adequate and timely supportive care help in successful management of the unfortunate victim of accidental intoxication.

Management of Poisonings and Intoxications

Poisoning occurs after exposure to any of a number of substances, including medicines, which can result in severe toxicity including death. The nephrologist may be involved in poisonings that cause kidney disease and for targeted treatments. The overall approach to the poisoned patient involves the initial acute resuscitation and performing a risk assessment, whereby the exposure is considered in terms of the anticipated severity and in the context of the patient's status and treatments that may be required. Time-critical interventions such as gastrointestinal decontamination ( e.g. , activated charcoal) and antidotes are administered when indicated. The nephrologist is usually involved when elimination enhancement techniques are required, such as urine alkalinization or extracorporeal treatments. There is increasing data to guide decision making for the use of extracorporeal treatments in the poisoned patient. Principles to consider are clinical indications such as whether severe toxicity is present, anticipated, and/or will persist and whether the poison will be significantly removed by the extracorporeal treatment. Extracorporeal clearance is maximized for low-molecular weight drugs that are water soluble with minimal protein binding (<80%) and low endogenous clearance and volume of distribution. The dosage of some antidotes ( e.g. , N-acetylcysteine, ethanol, fomepizole) should be increased to maintain therapeutic concentrations once the extracorporeal treatment is initiated. To maximize the effect of an extracorporeal treatment, blood and effluent flows should be optimized, the filter with the largest surface area selected, and duration tailored to remove enough poison to reduce toxicity. Intermittent hemodialysis is recommended in most cases when an extracorporeal treatment is required because it is the most efficient, and continuous kidney replacement therapy is prescribed in some circumstances, particularly if intermittent hemodialysis is not readily available.

[Hemoperfusion and plasmapheresis in the intensive care unit]

In addition to kidney replacement procedures, several other extracorporeal procedures are employed in the intensive care unit. Hemoperfusion with activated charcoal was the predominant treatment used for removal of toxins from the 1970s until the millennium. Nowadays, this treatment does no longer play a clinically meaningful role as even strongly protein-bound toxins can be removed by effective dialysis procedures in case poisoning. The concept of a cytokine adsorber was introduced 10 years ago, which is directed towards withstanding the cytokine storm. Despite negative data from prospective randomized controlled studies, its use is steadily increasing in Germany. A totally different treatment concept is the biomimetic pathogen adsorber, which removes bacteria, viruses and fungi from the bloodstream by binding to immobilized heparin. Whether this rapid reduction of the pathogen load translates into an improvement of clinically relevant endpoints is unclear, as prospective randomized controlled studies are lacking. For the early hours of septic shock a very old procedure, plasmapheresis, has recently regained interest. The results of two large randomized controlled studies in this setting from Europe and Canada will become available in 2025/2026. The rationale to use plasma exchange in early sepsis is that this procedure not only removes cytokines but also replenishes reduced levels of protective factors, such as angiopoietin‑1, a disintegrin and metalloproteinase with a thrombospondin type 1 motif, member 13 (ADAMTS-13) and protein C, if fresh plasma is used as exchange fluid. All afore mentioned procedures do not only have a different mode of action but are also used at seperate time points of bloodstream infections and/or sepsis.

Quinine overdose: Not quite gin and tonic

Quinine has been used in Western medicine since the 16th century, and far longer in South America. It has gained an undeserved reputation as an effective treatment for leg cramps and continues to be widely used in the United Kingdom and elsewhere despite warnings from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The effects in overdose are outlined and a personal perspective of scientific investigation of treatments at one time advocated provided.

Hämoperfusion und Plasmapherese auf der Intensivstation

Neben Nierenersatzverfahren werden auf der Intensivstation mehrere andere extrakorporale Verfahren eingesetzt. In den 1970er- bis 2000er-Jahren stand die Hämoperfusion mit Aktivkohlekapseln zur Entfernung von Toxinen im Vordergrund. Dies ist mittlerweile aufgrund der effektiven Dialyseverfahren, die im Vergiftungsfall auch stark proteingebundene Toxine entfernen, fast bedeutungslos geworden. Vor 10 Jahren erlebte ein Zytokinadsorber die Markteinführung, der darauf gerichtet ist, den „Zytokinsturm“ zu überstehen. Dieser erfreut sich trotz ernüchternder Daten aus prospektiven, randomisierten, kontrollierten Studien wachsender Beliebtheit. Ein gänzlich anderes Therapiekonzept ist der biomimetische Pathogenadsorber, der Bakterien, Viren und Pilze durch Bindung an immobilisiertes Heparin aus dem Blutstrom entfernt. Ob sich diese schnelle Reduktion der Pathogenlast in eine Verbesserung klinisch relevanter Endpunkte übersetzt, ist unklar, da hier prospektive, randomisierte und kontrollierte Studien gänzlich fehlen. Für ein sehr altes Verfahren, nämlich die Plasmapherese, werden wir für die Frühphase der Sepsis bis zum Jahr 2025/2026 Ergebnisse aus 2 großen randomisierten, kontrollierten Studien aus Europa und Kanada erhalten. Neben der Entfernung von Zytokinen erhofft man sich durch die Verwendung von Frischplasma als Austauschflüssigkeit auch das Wiederauffüllen reduzierter protektiver Faktoren wie Angiopoietin 1, ADAMTS13 („a disintegrin and metalloproteinase with a thrombospondin type 1 motif, member 13“) und Protein C. Alle genannten Verfahren funktionieren nicht nur unterschiedlich, sondern werden auch zu unterschiedlichen Zeitpunkten der Blutstrominfektion/Sepsis eingesetzt.

A methodologic survey on use of the GRADE approach in evidence syntheses published in high-impact factor urology and nephrology journals

Background

To identify and describe the use of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach for rating the certainty of systematic reviews (SRs) evidence published in urology and nephrology journals.

Methods

SRs that were published in the top ten "urology and nephrology" journals with the highest impact factor according to the 2020 Journal Citation Reports (covering 2016–2020) were systematically searched and evaluated using the GRADE approach.

Results

A total of 445 SRs were researched. Sixty SRs of randomized control trials (RCTs) and/or non-randomized studies (NRSs) were evaluated using the GRADE approach. Forty-nine SRs (11%) rated the outcome-specific certainty of evidence (n = 29 in 2019–2020). We identified 811 certainty of evidence outcome ratings (n = 544 RCT ratings) as follows: very low (33.0%); low (32.1%); moderate (24.5%); and high (10.4%). Very low and high certainty of evidence ratings accounted for 55.0% and 0.4% of ratings in SRs of NRSs compared to 23.0% and 15.3% in SRs of RCTs. The certainty of evidence for RCTs and NRSs was downgraded most often for risk of bias and imprecision.

Conclusions

We recommend increased emphasis on acceptance of the GRADE approach, as well as optimal use of the GRADE approach, in the synthesis of urinary tract evidence.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01701-x.

Acute Hydroxychloroquine Overdose: A Review of Published Pediatric Cases With Confirmed Hydroxychloroquine Exposure

OBJECTIVES

This review aimed to explore and summarize information from available cases of pediatric acute hydroxychloroquine overdose with confirmed hydroxychloroquine exposure to give the clinicians a helpful perspective for its better recognition and management.

METHODS

Electronic searches were conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, EBSCO and Serbian Citation Index. The abstracts from 2 toxicology conferences were manually checked for additional relevant publications, as well as reference lists of the retrieved publications. Descriptive statistics, narrative summation, and tabulation of the extracted data were made.

RESULTS

Nine publications and a total of 9 patients were included in the review. Reported age of the patients varied from 2.5 to 16 years (median, 16 years). There were more female patients (77.8%). Estimated total ingested hydroxychloroquine dose was reported in 7 cases (77.8%), and it ranged from 4.0 to 20.0 g (median: 12.0 g). Four patients (44.4%) ingested hydroxychloroquine with a coingestant. Altered mental status (100.0%), cardiotoxicity (88.9%), hypotension (77.8%), and hypokalemia (55.6%) were the most commonly reported clinical manifestations. The majority of the patients were hospitalized (88.9%). More than half of the patients (55.6%) were reported to be treated in the intensive care unit. Most frequently reported therapeutic measures were the following: administration of intravenous fluids/infusions (77.8%), vasopressors (77.8%), bicarbonate therapy-sodium bicarbonate (66.7%), potassium replacement (55.6%), and intubation/ventilation (55.6%). Three patients (33.3%) died.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of acute hydroxychloroquine overdose in children should be symptomatic and tailored to observed clinical manifestations. There is a need for additional investigations to better understand the impact and effectiveness of various treatment options.

Extracorporeal Treatment for Methotrexate Poisoning: Systematic Review and Recommendations from the EXTRIP Workgroup

Methotrexate is used in the treatment of many malignancies, rheumatological diseases, and inflammatory bowel disease. Toxicity from use is associated with severe morbidity and mortality. Rescue treatments include intravenous hydration, folinic acid, and, in some centers, glucarpidase. We conducted systematic reviews of the literature following published EXtracorporeal TReatments In Poisoning (EXTRIP) methods to determine the utility of extracorporeal treatments in the management of methotrexate toxicity. The quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations (either "strong" or "weak/conditional") were graded according to the GRADE approach. A formal voting process using a modified Delphi method assessed the level of agreement between panelists on the final recommendations. A total of 92 articles met inclusion criteria. Toxicokinetic data were available on 90 patients (89 with impaired kidney function). Methotrexate was considered to be moderately dialyzable by intermittent hemodialysis. Data were available for clinical analysis on 109 patients (high-dose methotrexate [>0.5 g/m2]: 91 patients; low-dose [≤0.5 g/m2]: 18). Overall mortality in these publications was 19.5% and 26.7% in those with high-dose and low-dose methotrexate-related toxicity, respectively. Although one observational study reported lower mortality in patients treated with glucarpidase compared with those treated with hemodialysis, there were important limitations in the study. For patients with severe methotrexate toxicity receiving standard care, the EXTRIP workgroup: (1) suggested against extracorporeal treatments when glucarpidase is not administered; (2) recommended against extracorporeal treatments when glucarpidase is administered; and (3) recommended against extracorporeal treatments instead of administering glucarpidase. The quality of evidence for these recommendations was very low. Rationales for these recommendations included: (1) extracorporeal treatments mainly remove drugs in the intravascular compartment, whereas methotrexate rapidly distributes into cells; (2) extracorporeal treatments remove folinic acid; (3) in rare cases where fast removal of methotrexate is required, glucarpidase will outperform any extracorporeal treatment; and (4) extracorporeal treatments do not appear to reduce the incidence and magnitude of methotrexate toxicity.

Massive Nonfatal Hydroxychloroquine Ingestion in a Pediatric Patient

BACKGROUND

Hydroxychloroquine overdose is rare but potentially lethal. Hydroxychloroquine overdose symptoms are characterized by central nervous system toxicity, cardiac toxicity, and hypokalemia. Recommended treatment consists of epinephrine, high-dose diazepam, and careful potassium repletion. Few pediatric hydroxychloroquine overdoses have been reported.

CASE REPORT

We describe a 14-year-old girl who ingested 10 g (172 mg/kg) of hydroxychloroquine. She developed tachycardia, hypotension, and hypokalemia. She was intubated and treated with diazepam and epinephrine infusions and potassium supplementation. Her serum hydroxychloroquine concentration obtained 10 h after ingestion was 13,000 ng/mL (reference range 500-2000 ng/mL). The patient made a full medical recovery. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: Pediatric hydroxychloroquine overdoses are reported rarely, and the toxic and lethal doses of hydroxychloroquine ingestion have not been established. This case of a teenaged patient who ingested 10 g of hydroxychloroquine and survived provides additional information that may be used to help establish toxic and lethal doses of ingestion.

Extracorporeal Treatment for Gabapentin and Pregabalin Poisoning: Systematic Review and Recommendations From the EXTRIP Workgroup

Toxicity from gabapentin and pregabalin overdose is commonly encountered. Treatment is supportive, and the use of extracorporeal treatments (ECTRs) is controversial. The EXTRIP workgroup conducted systematic reviews of the literature and summarized findings following published methods. Thirty-three articles (30 patient reports and 3 pharmacokinetic studies) met the inclusion criteria. High gabapentinoid extracorporeal clearance (>150mL/min) and short elimination half-life (<5 hours) were reported with hemodialysis. The workgroup assessed gabapentin and pregabalin as "dialyzable" for patients with decreased kidney function (quality of the evidence grade as A and B, respectively). Limited clinical data were available (24 patients with gabapentin toxicity and 7 with pregabalin toxicity received ECTR). Severe toxicity, mortality, and sequelae were rare in cases receiving ECTR and in historical controls receiving standard care alone. No clear clinical benefit from ECTR could be identified although major knowledge gaps were acknowledged, as well as costs and harms of ECTR. The EXTRIP workgroup suggests against performing ECTR in addition to standard care rather than standard care alone (weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence) for gabapentinoid poisoning in patients with normal kidney function. If decreased kidney function and coma requiring mechanical ventilation are present, the workgroup suggests performing ECTR in addition to standard care (weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence).

Extracorporeal treatment for poisoning to beta-adrenergic antagonists: systematic review and recommendations from the EXTRIP workgroup

BACKGROUND

β-adrenergic antagonists (BAAs) are used to treat cardiovascular disease such as ischemic heart disease, congestive heart failure, dysrhythmias, and hypertension. Poisoning from BAAs can lead to severe morbidity and mortality. We aimed to determine the utility of extracorporeal treatments (ECTRs) in BAAs poisoning.

METHODS

We conducted systematic reviews of the literature, screened studies, extracted data, and summarized findings following published EXTRIP methods.

RESULTS

A total of 76 studies (4 in vitro and 2 animal experiments, 1 pharmacokinetic simulation study, 37 pharmacokinetic studies on patients with end-stage kidney disease, and 32 case reports or case series) met inclusion criteria. Toxicokinetic or pharmacokinetic data were available on 334 patients (including 73 for atenolol, 54 for propranolol, and 17 for sotalol). For intermittent hemodialysis, atenolol, nadolol, practolol, and sotalol were assessed as dialyzable; acebutolol, bisoprolol, and metipranolol were assessed as moderately dialyzable; metoprolol and talinolol were considered slightly dialyzable; and betaxolol, carvedilol, labetalol, mepindolol, propranolol, and timolol were considered not dialyzable. Data were available for clinical analysis on 37 BAA poisoned patients (including 9 patients for atenolol, 9 for propranolol, and 9 for sotalol), and no reliable comparison between the ECTR cohort and historical controls treated with standard care alone could be performed. The EXTRIP workgroup recommends against using ECTR for patients severely poisoned with propranolol (strong recommendation, very low quality evidence). The workgroup offered no recommendation for ECTR in patients severely poisoned with atenolol or sotalol because of apparent balance of risks and benefits, except for impaired kidney function in which ECTR is suggested (weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence). Indications for ECTR in patients with impaired kidney function include refractory bradycardia and hypotension for atenolol or sotalol poisoning, and recurrent torsade de pointes for sotalol. Although other BAAs were considered dialyzable, clinical data were too limited to develop recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

BAAs have different properties affecting their removal by ECTR. The EXTRIP workgroup assessed propranolol as non-dialyzable. Atenolol and sotalol were assessed as dialyzable in patients with kidney impairment, and the workgroup suggests ECTR in patients severely poisoned with these drugs when aforementioned indications are present.

Extracorporeal treatments for isoniazid poisoning: Systematic review and recommendations from the EXTRIP workgroup

Isoniazid toxicity from self-poisoning or dosing errors remains common in regions of the world where tuberculosis is prevalent. Although the treatment of isoniazid poisoning is centered on supportive care and pyridoxine administration, extracorporeal treatments (ECTRs), such as hemodialysis, have been advocated to enhance elimination of isoniazid. No systematic reviews or evidence-based recommendations currently exist on the benefit of ECTRs for isoniazid poisoning. The Extracorporeal Treatments in Poisoning (EXTRIP) workgroup systematically collected and rated the available evidence on the effect of and indications for ECTRs in cases of isoniazid poisoning. We conducted a systematic review of the literature, screened studies, extracted data on study characteristics, outcomes, and measurement characteristics, summarized findings, and formulated recommendations following published EXTRIP methods. Forty-three studies (two animal studies, 34 patient reports or patient series, and seven pharmacokinetic studies) met inclusion criteria. Toxicokinetic or pharmacokinetic analysis was available for 60 patients, most treated with hemodialysis (n = 38). The workgroup assessed isoniazid as "Moderately Dialyzable" by hemodialysis for patients with normal kidney function (quality of evidence = C) and "Dialyzable" by hemodialysis for patients with impaired kidney function (quality of evidence = A). Clinical data for ECTR in isoniazid poisoning were available for 40 patients. Mortality of the cohort was 12.5%. Historical controls who received modern standard care including appropriately dosed pyridoxine generally had excellent outcomes. No benefit could be extrapolated from ECTR, although there was evidence of added costs and harms related to the double lumen catheter insertion, the extracorporeal procedure itself, and the extracorporeal removal of pyridoxine. The EXTRIP workgroup suggests against performing ECTR in addition to standard care (weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence) in patients with isoniazid poisoning. If standard dose pyridoxine cannot be administered, we suggest performing ECTR only in patients with seizures refractory to GABA_A receptor agonists (weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence).

Extracorporeal treatment for calcium channel blocker poisoning: systematic review and recommendations from the EXTRIP workgroup

BACKGROUND

Calcium channel blockers (CCBs) are commonly used to treat conditions such as arterial hypertension and supraventricular dysrhythmias. Poisoning from these drugs can lead to severe morbidity and mortality. We aimed to determine the utility of extracorporeal treatments (ECTRs) in the management of CCB poisoning.

METHODS

We conducted systematic reviews of the literature, screened studies, extracted data, summarized findings, and formulated recommendations following published EXTRIP methods.

RESULTS

A total of 83 publications (6 in vitro and 1 animal experiments, 55 case reports or case series, 19 pharmacokinetic studies, 1 cohort study and 1 systematic review) met inclusion criteria regarding the effect of ECTR. Toxicokinetic or pharmacokinetic data were available on 210 patients (including 32 for amlodipine, 20 for diltiazem, and 52 for verapamil). Regardless of the ECTR used, amlodipine, bepridil, diltiazem, felodipine, isradipine, mibefradil, nifedipine, nisoldipine, and verapamil were considered not dialyzable, with variable levels of evidence, while no dialyzability grading was possible for nicardipine and nitrendipine. Data were available for clinical analysis on 78 CCB poisoned patients (including 32 patients for amlodipine, 16 for diltiazem, and 23 for verapamil). Standard care (including high dose insulin euglycemic therapy) was not systematically administered. Clinical data did not suggest an improvement in outcomes with ECTR. Consequently, the EXTRIP workgroup recommends against using ECTR in addition to standard care for patients severely poisoned with either amlodipine, diltiazem or verapamil (strong recommendations, very low quality of the evidence (1D)). There were insufficient clinical data to draft recommendation for other CCBs, although the workgroup acknowledged the low dialyzability from, and lack of biological plausibility for, ECTR.

CONCLUSIONS

Both dialyzability and clinical data do not support a clinical benefit from ECTRs for CCB poisoning. The EXTRIP workgroup recommends against using extracorporeal methods to enhance the elimination of amlodipine, diltiazem, and verapamil in patients with severe poisoning.