The FLT3/ITD mutation exists in many acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients and is related to the poor prognosis of patients. In this study, we attempted to evaluate the antitumor activity of simvastatin, a member of the statin class of drugs, in vitro and in vivo models of FLT3/ITD AML and to identify the potential mechanisms. Cell Counting Kit-8 (CCK-8) and Annexin V/propidium iodide (PI) staining kits were used to detect cell viability and apoptosis, respectively. Subsequently, Western blot and rescue experiment were applied to explore the potential molecular mechanism. In vivo anti-leukemia activity of simvastatin was evaluated in xenograft mouse models. In vitro experiments revealed that simvastatin inhibited AML progression in a dose- and time-dependent manner, while in vivo experiments showed that simvastatin significantly reduced tumor burden in FLT3/ITD xenograft mouse models. After simvastatin treatment of FLT3/ITD AML cells, intracellular Rap1 was downregulated and the phosphorylation levels of its downstream targets MEK, ERK and p38 were significantly inhibited. The rescue experiment showed that mevalonate, an intermediate product of the metabolic pathway of mevalonate, and its downstream geranylgeranyl pyrophosphate (GGPP) played a key role in this process. Finally, we demonstrate that simvastatin can induce apoptosis of primary AML cells, while having no effect on peripheral blood mononuclear cells from normal donors. Simvastatin can selectively and effectively eradicate FLT3/ITD AML cells in vitro and in vivo, and its mechanism may be related to the disruption of the HMG-CoA reductase pathway and the downregulation of the MEK/ERK and p38-MAPK signaling pathways.

Tucatinib is a selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor of the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) approved to treat metastatic HER2-positive breast and colorectal cancers. The International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Human Use (ICH) E14 guideline mandates that new drugs are assessed for potential effects on cardiac repolarization through electrocardiogram (ECG) evaluation in a QT/corrected QT (TQT) study. We evaluated the effect of tucatinib on cardiac repolarization in healthy volunteers in a phase I, randomized, partially double-blind, placebo-and positive-controlled three-period crossover study. The primary endpoint was the placebo-corrected change from baseline in QT interval values, corrected for heart rate using Fridericia's method (ΔΔQTcF). After achieving steady-state tucatinib exposures with 300 mg twice daily, the observed ΔΔQTcF ranged from -2.9 msec at 2 hours post-dose to 0 msec at 4 hours post-dose. The upper bound of the 90% confidence interval (CI) was below 5 ms at all post-dose timepoints. Assay sensitivity was confirmed as the lower bound of the 90% CI and was >5 ms following moxifloxacin dosing. As the mean ΔΔQTcF of tucatinib was predicted to be - 1.80 ms (90% CI - 3.90, 0.30) at clinically relevant tucatinib concentrations (511 ng/mL), an effect of tucatinib on QTcF exceeding 10 ms was excluded within observed ranges of tucatinib (up to ~1000 ng/mL). Tucatinib had no clinically relevant effect on heart rate or cardiac conduction. The safety profile of tucatinib was manageable after multiple doses. Tucatinib had no clinically relevant effects on studied ECG parameters. This study constitutes a clearly negative TQT study per ICH E14 guidance. This trial (NCT03777761) was registered on 17 December 2018.

N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and soluble interleukin 1 receptor-like 1 ST2 (sST2) are biomarkers used to grade heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) severity. Both are potential targets of HFrEF treatment, but the first is associated with the patient's hemodynamic status, while the second is more indicative of the inflammatory status and of myocardial fibrosis. The aim of this study was to assess the kinetics of these biomarkers after treatment with sacubitril/valsartan in HFrEF. We analyzed blood samples of patients with HFrEF at baseline (before sacubitril/valsartan treatment), after 1, 2, and 3 months (respectively, after a month taking the 24/26 - 49/51 - 97/103 mg twice daily, or b.i.d., doses), and 6 months after the maximum-tolerated dose was reached (end study). We obtained samples from 72 patients with HFrEF (age 64.0 ± 10.5 years, 83% males). NT-proBNP and sST2 values progressively and significantly reduced to 37% and 16%, respectively, with a greater reduction for NT-proBNP (p < 0.001). Specifically, NT-proBNP reduced from 1144 [593-2586] pg/mL to 743 [358-1524] pg/mL and sST2 from 27.3 [20.5-35.0] ng/mL to 23.1 [15.9-30.7] ng/mL, p for trend < 0.001 in both cases. The reduction of the two biomarkers over time occurred with statistically significant different kinetics: deferred for sST2 and faster for NT-proBNP. No significant changes in renal function and potassium levels were recorded. These findings suggest that, in patients with HF, sacubitril/valsartan effects on the cardiovascular system share a double pathway: a first, hemodynamic, faster pathway and a second, non-hemodynamic anti-fibrotic, delayed one. Both likely contribute to the sacubitril/valsartan benefits in HFrEF.

Infigratinib is a fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR)-specifc tyrosine kinase inhibitor indicated for the treatment of patients with previously treated, unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma. However, few studies have been conducted to evaluated the safety of infigratinib in the real world. In this study, we conducted a pharmacovigilance study to evaluate the adverse events (AEs) of infigratinib by using the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. OpenVigil 2.1 was employed to extract the FAERS database. Descriptive analysis was used to describe the characteristics of infigratinib-associated AE reports. Disproportionality analysis was performed by calculating the proportional reporting ratio (PRR), reporting odds ratios (ROR), and Bayesian analysis confidence propagation neural network (BCPNN) to detect positive signals. Our findings revealed 149 AE reports, among which 36 significant signals were identified. These significant AE signals were mainly observed in gastrointestinal disorders (N=26, ROR=26.03, PRR=8.44, information component [IC]=3.08) and skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders (N=21, ROR=92.13, PRR=40.41, IC=5.34). Notably, dehydration and skin exfoliation were unexpected AEs, but had relatively high signal intensities (ROR=29.75, PRR=26.64, IC=4.74; ROR=50.61, PRR=45.24, IC=5.50, respectively) despite not being listed on the drug label. Furthermore, our analysis showed that infigratinib dose differed statistically between severe and non-severe reports (113.82±16.13mg vs 125±0.00 mg, t= - 4.28; p<0.001). However, there were no significant differences in sex, age, and types of AEs between the two groups (p =0.06, p =0.86, and p=0.93, respectively). These findings suggest that gastrointestinal and skin toxicities are the most common adverse reactions for infigratinib. It is important to recognize skin exfoliation and dehydration in clinical practice, as they are unexpected AEs. Additionally, our study indicates that infigratinib dose may correlate with an increased risk of AE severity, highlighting the need for dose adjustment of infigratinib when exposure to the drug is increased due to internal or external factors.

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic neurodegenerative disease that affects the central nervous system (CNS). Currently, MS treatment is limited to several Food and Drug Administration (FDA)- and European Medicines Agency (EMA)-approved medications that slow disease progression by immunomodulatory action. Fingolimod and siponimod have similar mechanisms of action, and consequently, their therapeutic effects may be comparable. However, while fingolimod is mainly used for relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS), siponimod, according to EMA label, is recommended for active secondary progressive MS (SPMS). Clinicians and scientists are analysing whether patients can switch from fingolimod to siponimod and identifying the advantages or disadvantages of such a switch from a therapeutic point of view. In this review, we aim to discuss the therapeutic effects of these two drugs and the advantages/disadvantages of switching treatment from fingolimod to siponimod in patients with the most common forms of MS, RRMS and SPMS.

Adalimumab-aqvh/CHS-1420 (YUSIMRYTM) (hereafter referred to as adalimumab-aqvh) was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration as a biosimilar for adalimumab. The current study was conducted to investigate the analytical similarity of adalimumab-aqvh and the reference product, adalimumab. The structural, functional, and stability attributes of adalimumab-aqvh and adalimumab were compared using state-of-the-art assays. The primary structure, disulfide structure, glycan profile, secondary and tertiary structures, molar mass, size variants, free thiol, charge variants, hydrophobic variants, post-translational modifications, subvisible particles, host cell proteins, and protein concentration were investigated. The functional similarity between adalimumab-aqvh and adalimumab was demonstrated by comparing fragment antigen-binding (Fab)-associated and fragment crystallizable(Fc)-associated biological activities. The stability of adalimumab-aqvh and of adalimumab was compared through forced degradation. The structural attributes of adalimumab-aqvh were identical to those of adalimumab or met the similarity criteria, with a few exceptions. Adalimumab-aqvh and adalimumab exhibited comparable stability profiles and functional activities. Any observed differences in the physiochemical attributes did not impact the conclusion of similarity because they did not influence any functional activities related to the adalimumab mechanism of action. The structural, functional, and stability data provide convincing evidence of biosimilarity between adalimumab-aqvh and the reference product, adalimumab.

SB12 is a biosimilar to eculizumab reference product [SolirisTM (Soliris is a trademark of Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.)] that acts as a C5 complement protein inhibitor. The infusion stability of in-use (diluted) SB12 outside the conditions stated in the reference product's label is unknown. The objective of this study was to assess the stability of SB12 after extended storage in conditions not claimed in the originator label. Infusion stability was assessed in SB12 samples (diluted in 0.9% NaCl, 0.45% NaCl, and 5% dextrose, final concentration of 5mg/mL per clinical trial protocol and the reference product's label) kept at 5±3°C for up to 3months, then 30±2°C/65±5% relative humidity (RH) for 72h. The product was stored in different containers [polyolefin (PO) bags, glass bottles and syringes], and the protocol followed International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) requirements for stability evaluation of biological products. Stability was evaluated using complementary assays, including pH, protein concentration (A280), purity (size exclusion-high-performance liquid chromatography, capillary electrophoresis-sodium dodecyl sulfate, and imaged capillary isoelectric focusing), biological activity (C5 binding and inhibition), and safety (subvisible particles). Except for charge variants in SB12 diluted in 5% dextrose, all results met the stability acceptance criteria. There were no major changes in terms of physicochemical stability, biological activity, and subvisible particles. The infusion stability of SB12 after extended storage (5±3°C for up to 3months, then 30±2°C/65±5% RH for72 h) was demonstrated for longer periods and at higher temperatures than what is stated in the EU and US labels of the reference product. The physicochemical properties, biological activity, and subvisible particles of in-use SB12 diluted in 0.9%NaCl and 0.45%NaCl were maintained under the described conditions and for all tested containers. However, instability was observed for the diluted SB12 in 5%dextrose. These results may reduce the workload of clinical staff and minimize drug waste from treatment delays without any loss in product quality and biological activity.

Calcineurin inhibitors such as cyclosporine and tacrolimus are immunosuppressant drugs that are known to induce tremors. Non-calcineurin inhibitors such as sirolimus and everolimus have also reportedly been accompanied by tremors, albeit less likely. However, the prevalence rates reported in the literature are notably wide, and the risk profiles for these drug-induced tremors are less understood. We searched PubMed to extract data on the risk of tremors with these drugs when prescribed for various transplant and non-transplant indications. We ascertained whether the risk of drug-induced tremor is influenced by the underlying diagnosis, dosing formulations, drug concentrations, and blood monitoring. We extracted data on treatment strategies and outcomes for tremors. Articles were primarily screened based on English language publications, abstracts, and studies with n ≥ 5, which included case series, retrospective studies, case-controlled studies, and prospective studies. We found 81 eligible studies comprising 33 cyclosporine, 43 tacrolimus, 6 sirolimus, and 1 everolimus that discussed tremor as an adverse event. In the pooled analysis of studies with n > 100, the incidence of tremor was 17% with cyclosporine, 21.5% with tacrolimus, and 7.8% with sirolimus and everolimus together. Regarding the underlying diagnosis, tremor was more frequently reported in kidney transplant (cyclosporine 28%, tacrolimus 30.1%) and bone marrow transplant (cyclosporine 40%, tacrolimus 41.9%) patients compared with liver transplant (cyclosporine 9%, tacrolimus 11.5%) and nontransplant indications (cyclosporine 21.5%, tacrolimus 11.3%). Most studies did not report whether the risk of tremors correlated with drug concentrations in the blood. The prevalence of tremors when using the twice-daily formulation of tacrolimus was nearly the same as the once-daily formulation (17% vs 18%). Data on individual-level risk factors for tremors were lacking. Except for three studies that found some benefit to maintaining magnesium levels, there were minimal data on treatments and outcomes. A large body of data supports a substantive and wide prevalence of tremor resulting from tacrolimus use followed by cyclosporine, especially in patients receiving a kidney transplant. However, there is little reporting on the patient-related risk factors for tremor, risk relationship with drug concentrations, treatment strategies, and outcomes.

At present, the therapies of dilated cardiomyopathy concentrated on the symptoms of heart failure and related complications. The study is to evaluate the clinical efficacy of a combination of various conventional and adjuvant drugs in treating dilated cardiomyopathy via network meta-analysis. The study was reported according to the PRISMA 2020 statement. From inception through 27 June 2022, the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, and Web of Science databases were searched for randomized controlled trials on medicines for treating dilated cardiomyopathy. The quality of the included studies was evaluated according to the Cochrane risk of bias assessment. R4.1.3 and Revman5.3 software were used for analysis. There were 52 randomized controlled trials in this study, with a total of 25 medications and a sample size of 3048 cases. The network meta-analysis found that carvedilol, verapamil, and trimetazidine were the top three medicines for improving left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Ivabradine, bucindolol, and verapamil were the top 3 drugs for improving left ventricular end-diastolic dimension (LVEDD). Ivabradine, L-thyroxine, and atorvastatin were the top 3 drugs for improving left ventricular end-systolic dimension (LVESD). Trimetazidine, pentoxifylline, and bucindolol were the top 3 drugs for improving the New York Heart Association classification (NYHA) cardiac function score. Ivabradine, carvedilol, and bucindolol were the top 3 drugs for reducing heart rate (HR). A combination of different medications and conventional therapy may increase the clinical effectiveness of treating dilated cardiomyopathy. Beta-blockers, especially carvedilol, can improve ventricular remodeling, cardiac function, and clinical efficacy in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). Hence, they can be used if patients tolerate them. If LVEF and HR do not meet the standard, ivabradine can also be used in combination with other treatments. However, since the quality and number of studies in our research were limited, large sample size, multi-center, and high-quality randomized controlled trials are required to corroborate our findings.

Tramadol has been reported to cause hyponatremia but the evidence is conflicting. The risk of hyponatremia resulting from combination oral tramadol/acetaminophen (TA) therapy is thus unknown. This study examined whether, compared with acetaminophen (AA), TA use is associated with an increased risk of hyponatremia. Hospital data compatible with the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership-Common Data Model (OMOP-CDM; version 5.3) for 30,999 patients taking TA or AA from 2011 through 2020 were analyzed. New-onset hyponatremia was defined as a serum sodium level <135mEq/L within 10days after drug initiation. The incidence rate ratio was calculated based on crude and 1:1 propensity-score-matched models. Subgroup analyses compared patients taking TA extended-release (TA-ER) and TA immediate-release (TA-IR) formulations. Among the 30,999 patients, 12,122 (39.1%) were aged >65years and 16,654 (53.7%) were male. Hyponatremia within 10days developed in 1613 (8.4%) of the 19,149 patients in the TA group; the incidence rate was higher than in the AA group (4.2%; 493 out of 11,850 cases). In the propensity-score-matched model, the incidence rate of hyponatremia in the TA group was 6.8 per 1000 person-days (PD), which was 1.57-fold (1.31, 1.89) higher than that in the AA group (4.3 per 1000 PD). In both the crude and propensity-score-matched models, the incidence rate of hyponatremia was significantly higher in the TA-ER than TA-IR subgroup. In this real-world study, hyponatremia was more frequently observed in the TA than AA group, and in the TA-ER than TA-IR subgroup. Therefore, it is imperative to prescribe tramadol cautiously and closely monitor electrolyte levels.