Incidence Of Drug-related Adverse Events Research Articles

The Comparison Between Long-Term and Short-Term Administration of Itraconazole for Primary Antifungal Prophylaxis in Recipients of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell: A Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label Trial (NCT01160952)

Abstract 1930 Background:Invasive fungal infection (IFI) is a major cause of death in recipients of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (allo-HSCT). Although antifungal prophylaxis has been demonstrated effective for prevention of IFI after allo-HSCT, the optimal agents and the term of prophylaxis remain a matter of discussion. To investigate the effect of prophylaxis term for IFI after allo-HSCT, this multicenter, randomized, open-label study was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety between long-term and short-term administration of itraconazole for primary antifungal prophylaxis in recipients of allo-HSCT. Methods:A total of 128 patients without a history of IFI were enrolled in this study. The primary antifungal prophylaxis was initiated when WBC count < 1.0*10⋀9/L or on day 0. Itraconazole was administered intravenously with a loading dose of 400 mg·d−1for 2 days followed by 200 mg·d−1and switched to itraconazole orally on day +14 or when WBC count > 1.0*10⋀9/L until 30 days post-HSCT in short-term arm or 90 days in long-term arm. The primary endpoint was the incidence of proven or probable IFI at 30 days and 90 days post-HSCT. Results:Of the 129 enrolled patients, date of 121 cases were used to determine the primary endpoint in the intent-to-treat population (59 for long-term and 62 for short-term) and 7 patients died of transplant complication or other causes before the use of itraconazole. The baseline demographic and transplant characteristic were similar in the two arms. The incidence of proven and probable IFI within 90 days post-transplants was 1.69%. Intent-to-treat analysis showed that there was not a significant difference in the rate of breakthrough IFI (proven or probable IFI) between he long-term and short-term arm (1.69% vs. 0%; P=0.311). The incidence of IFI (proven, probable, and possible) in long-term arm was higher than short-term arm within 90 days post-transplants (6.78% vs. 0%, P=0.03). Acute GVHD was the risk factor affected the occurrence of IFI after HSCT (OR= 2.750, 95%CI 1.939–3.901, P=0.023). Prophylaxis was interrupted in 11 patients due to event of intolerance, including 1 in the short-term arm and 10 in the long-term arm (P=0.004). The incidences of drug-related adverse events in the two arms were similar (6.78% vs. 3.23%, P=0.43). The incidence of overall survival at 6 months was 75.74% in long-term arm and 84.56% in short-term arm (P=0.459). Conclusions:This study indicates that itraconazole was effective for prevention of IFI within 30 days post-HSCT. Whether the prolonged term administration of antifungal agent for prevention fungal infection is benefit to the recipients in allo-HSCT is worthy of further exploration.This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01160952. Disclosures:No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Pyronaridine-artesunate granules versus artemether-lumefantrine crushed tablets in children with Plasmodium falciparum malaria: a randomized controlled trial

BackgroundChildren are most vulnerable to malaria. A pyronaridine-artesunate pediatric granule formulation is being developed for the treatment of uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria.MethodsThis phase III, multi-center, comparative, open-label, parallel-group, controlled clinical trial included patients aged ≤12 years, bodyweight ≥5 to <25 kg, with a reported history of fever at inclusion or in the previous 24 h and microscopically-confirmed uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria. Patients were randomized (2:1) to pyronaridine-artesunate granules (60/20 mg) once daily or artemether-lumefantrine crushed tablets (20/120 mg) twice daily, both dosed by bodyweight, orally (liquid suspension) for three days.ResultsOf 535 patients randomized, 355 received pyronaridine-artesunate and 180 received artemether-lumefantrine. Day-28 adequate clinical and parasitological response (ACPR), corrected for re-infection using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) genotyping (per-protocol population) was 97.1% (329/339; 95% CI 94.6, 98.6) for pyronaridine-artesunate; 98.8% (165/167; 95% CI 95.7, 99.9) for artemether-lumefantrine. The primary endpoint was achieved: pyronaridine-artesunate PCR-corrected day-28 ACPR was statistically significantly >90% (P < .0001). Pyronaridine-artesunate was non-inferior to artemether-lumefantrine: treatment difference -1.8% (95% CI -4.3 to 1.6). The incidence of drug-related adverse events was 37.2% (132/355) with pyronaridine-artesunate, 44.4% (80/180) with artemether-lumefantrine. Clinical biochemistry results showed similar mean changes versus baseline in the two treatment groups. From day 3 until study completion, one patient in each treatment group had peak alanine aminotransferase (ALT) >3 times the upper limit of normal (ULN) and peak total bilirubin >2xULN (i.e. within the Hy’s law definition).ConclusionsThe pyronaridine-artesunate pediatric granule formulation was efficacious and was non-inferior to artemether-lumefantrine. The adverse event profile was similar for the two comparators. Pyronaridine-artesunate should be considered for inclusion in paediatric malaria treatment programmes.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: identifier NCT00541385

Potential Risks Associated with Medication Administration, as Identified by Simple Tools and Observations

Adverse events are common in health care institutions. In a study published in 2007, the Canadian Institute for Health Information reported that “1 in 13 adult medical and surgical patients admitted to acute care hospitals in Canada in 2000 experienced an adverse event”. Medication errors are among the most frequent adverse events. In an international survey of adults with health problems, administered by The Commonwealth Fund, about 10% of Canadian respondents reported having received the wrong medication or dose from a health care provider in the previous 2 years. These errors may result in morbidity, mortality, increases in monitoring and costs of care, and delays in hospital discharge. A prospective cohort study analyzing the incidence of drug-related adverse events in 2 tertiary care hospitals showed that 34% of preventable adverse medication-related events were at the administration stage, making this category the second most frequent cause (after errors at the ordering stage, which accounted for 56% of preventable adverse medication events). Given this reality, the management of medication-related risks is a priority for hospitals. The medication-use system is complex, with a total of 54 identified phases, for which many activities, tools, equipment, and information systems are needed and for which several interfaces are typically required. Many of these phases, particularly the medication administration process, carry high risks. Typically, nurses are responsible for the critical stages of the medication-use system, with a risk of error at each stage. Importantly, there seems to be a link between the way nurses’ work is organized and the occurrence of errors during the administration of medications. According to a study on nurses’ perceptions of medication errors, “a single hospital patient can receive up to 18 medications per day, and a nurse can administer as many as 50 medications per working shift”. A study of the delivery of nursing care in acute care settings showed that nurses spent 16% of their time preparing or administering medications. In addition, 22% of interruptions occurred during the medication preparation process. A high number of interruptions can lead to medication errors. At the authors’ centre, medication errors were an important cause of incidents and accidents from 2004 to 2010. More specifically, medication errors represented 74% of incidents and accidents in 2004/2005, although this proportion was reduced to 39% in 2010/2011. Errors related to drug administration represented 66.3% of these medication errors. Various preventive strategies are used to manage risk within the medication-use system, including training and use of daily unit-dose medication distribution systems, with medication carts containing individual drawers designated for specific patients (identified by bed numbers). Nonetheless, errors still occur frequently in health care institutions.

Intravenous iron treatment in pregnancy: comparison of high-dose ferric carboxymaltose vs. iron sucrose

Oral iron substitution has shown to be insufficient for treatment of severe iron deficiency anemia in pregnancy. Ferric carboxymaltose is a new intravenous (i.v.) iron formulation promising to be more effective and as safe as iron sucrose. We aimed to assess side effects and tolerance of ferric carboxymaltose compared to i.v. iron sucrose in pregnant women. We performed a retrospective analysis of 206 pregnant women who were treated either with ferric carboxymaltose or iron sucrose for iron-deficiency anemia with intolerability to oral iron substitution, or insufficient hemoglobin increase after oral iron treatment, or need for rapid hemoglobin reconstitution. Primary endpoint was to evaluate the maternal safety and tolerability. Secondary endpoint was to assess efficacy of the treatment and exclude safety concerns for the fetus. The incidence of drug-related adverse events was low and mostly mild in both groups. Mild adverse events occurred in 7.8% for ferric carboxymaltose and in 10.7% for iron sucrose. The mean rise of hemoglobin value was 15.4 g/L for ferric carboxymaltose and 11.7 g/L for iron sucrose. Ferric carboxymaltose administration in pregnant women is well tolerated and is not associated with any relevant clinical safety concerns. Ferric carboxymaltose has a comparable safety profile to iron sucrose but offers the advantage of a much higher iron dosage at a time reducing the need for repeated applications and increasing patients' comfort. Ferric carboxymaltose is the drug of choice, if i.v. iron treatment becomes necessary in the second or third trimester of pregnancy.

Moxifloxacin monotherapy for treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of moxifloxacin monotherapy for treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections. PubMed, EMBASE, Science Direct, ClinicalTrials.gov and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to retrieve randomised controlled trials (RCTs) compared moxifloxacin monotherapy with other antibiotics in the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections from January 1999 to July 2011. A meta-analysis of all included randomised controlled trials was performed. Four randomised controlled trials including a total of 2444 patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections were included for meta-analysis. The results of the meta-analysis indicated that the moxifloxacin was associated with similar clinical cure rate (four RCTs, 1934 patients, OR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.61, 1.04, p = 0.09), bacteriological success rates (four RCTs, 1484 patients, OR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.59, 1.05, p = 0.11) and mortality (four RCTs, 2227 patients, OR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.45, 1.83, p = 0.79) compared with the control group. The overall incidence of adverse events of moxifloxacin was significantly higher than that in the control group (three RCTs, 1367 patients, OR = 1.33, 95% CI: 1.07, 1.63, p = 0.008), although the incidence of drug-related adverse events (three RCTs, 1601 patients, OR = 1.13, 95% CI: 0.69, 1.85, p = 0.63) and serious adverse events (three RCTs, 1815 patients, OR = 1.23, 95% CI: 0.59, 2.60, p = 0.58) were similar between the compared treatment groups. Moxifloxacin is an effective and relatively safe option for the treatment of patients with intra-abdominal infections. Moxifloxacin monotherapy has similar efficacy to combination therapy.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of sarpogrelate on the surrogate markers for macrovascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes

Sarpogrelate, a selective 5-HT(2) receptor antagonist, is known to have a significant effect on antiplatelet action. This study was a double-blinded, randomized, paralleled multicenter trial to compare the effects of sarpogrelate and aspirin on preventing macrovascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes. The subjects were randomly assigned to either the sarpogrelateor the aspirin group. The baseline parameters for macrovascular complications, such as intima media thickness (IMT), ankle-brachial index (ABI), IL-6, serotonin, adiponectin, and hsCRP, were measured before drug administration. Changes were compared at 6 and 12 months after the administration of each drug. A total of 127 subjects (63 in the sarpogrelate group and 64 in the aspirin group) were pooled during the study period. No significant differences were found in baseline IMT or in other predictors of macrovascular complications. The mean IMT increased in both groups after 12 months, but there was no significant difference between the two groups. No significant change was found in the other predictors of macrovascular complications nor in the incidence of drug-related adverse events between the two groups. During the study period, no significant differences were found between the sarpogrelate group and aspirin group in the clinical indices or in the safety of the subjects related to macrovascular complications. This suggests that sarpogrelate may be clinically useful for the primary prevention of macrovascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Multicenter, randomized study of genetically modified recombinant human interleukin-11 to prevent chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy

The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of genetically modified recombinant human IL-11 (mIL-11), using original IL-11 as an active control, in a multicenter randomized trial involving 88 cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy Eighty-eight subjects who had platelets ≤ 75 × 10(9)/L during the prior chemotherapy were randomized to the MR or RM group. Cohort MR consists of subcutaneous injection of mIL-11 (7.5 μg/kg/day) for 10 days, beginning 72 h after chemotherapy for a 21-day chemotherapy cycle (cycle-1) followed by that of recombinant human interleukin-11 (rhIL-11) (25 μg/kg/day) for another 10 days (cycle-2). Cohort RM represents the reverse sequence. Intent-to-treat populations of mIL-11 (n = 73) or rhIL-11 (n = 80) were analyzed to evaluate the safety. The incidence of drug-related adverse events of mIL-11 (32.9%) was lower than that of rhIL-11 (51.3%) (p = 0.033). There were no unexpected ≥ grade-3 adverse events, and no subject developed antibodies to the mIL-11 protein. Sixty-two subjects were analyzed for efficacy by measuring average platelet levels. Both mIL-11 and rhIL-11 increased nadir platelet levels (62.6 ± 34.9 × 10(9)/L for mIL-11 vs. 60.2 ± 31.7 × 10(9)/L for rhIL-11) as compared with the untreated control group (41.2 ± 17.7 × 10(9)/L) (p < 0.0001). There was no statistical difference in average platelet levels and platelet recovery rate between mIL-11 and rhIL-11. This study shows that mIL-11 is well tolerated and has thrombopoietic activity equivalent to one third of the clinical dose of rhIL-11, indicating the potential of mIL-11 for use in the treatment of CIT.

Efficacy and Tolerability of a New Extended-Release Formulation of Nicotinic Acid in Korean Adults With Mixed Dyslipidemia: An 8-Week, Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, and Placebo-Controlled Trial

Background Nicotinic acid is an effective treatment for dyslipidemia. Patients are more tolerant of the extended-release form of nicotinic acid because it has a lower incidence of side effects, such as facial flushing, than the immediate-release formulation. Objective This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of an experimental extended-release formulation of nicotinic acid in Korean adults with mixed dyslipidemia as a regulatory requirement to allow marketing of this product in Korea. Methods This study was a multicenter, prospective, randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled trial. Patients with low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels, high low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels, or high triglyceride levels were enrolled. Patients in the treatment group received 500 mg of extended-release niacin for 4 weeks and 1000 mg of extended-release niacin for the next 4 weeks. Results Twenty-five patients (24% males; mean [SD] age, 57.4 [6.9] years) comprised the treatment group, and 22 patients (5% males; mean [SD] age 61.8 [8.3] years) comprised the placebo group. After 8 weeks of treatment, HDL-C levels were increased significantly in the treatment group (17.6% vs –1.7%, respectively, from 35 [7] mg/dL to 42 [11] mg/dL in the treatment group and from 38 [6] mg/dL to 36 [7] mg/dL in the placebo group; P < 0.001). LDL-C levels were decreased significantly in the treatment group (–11.4% vs 3.6%, respectively, from 147 [33] mg/dL to 126 [22] mg/dL in the treatment group and from 146 [31] mg/dL to 148 [26] mg/dL in the placebo group; P = 0.003). The incidence of drug-related adverse events, including facial flushing in the treatment group, was not significantly different from that in the placebo group. Conclusions The tested extended-release formulation of nicotinic acid increased HDL-C levels significantly but decreased LDL-C levels with a low incidence of facial flushing in this small, select group of Korean adults with mixed dyslipidemia.

Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs in Community Hospitals: The Evidence Base and Case Studies

By controlling and changing how antimicrobial agents are selected and administered, antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) aim to prevent or slow the emergence of antimicrobial resistance; optimize the selection, dosing, and duration of antimicrobial therapy; reduce the incidence of drug-related adverse events; and lower rates of morbidity and mortality, length of hospitalization, and costs. There is an abundant and growing body of evidence demonstrating that ASPs change the quantity and quality of antimicrobial prescriptions; however, measuring whether, when, and how ASPs improve patient outcomes and change patterns of antimicrobial resistance--which is the ultimate goals of ASPs--has been difficult, but the totality of evidence indicates that ASPs are capable of achieving these goals. In this article, we review the existing data on ASPs and their effects on patient care and antimicrobial resistance, as well as strategies for establishing ASPs in different types of hospitals.

Safety and efficacy of raltegravir in patients with HIV‐1 and hepatitis B and/or C virus coinfection

The aim was to examine the long-term safety and efficacy of raltegravir in patients with HIV-1 and hepatitis B virus (HBV) and/or hepatitis C virus (HCV) coinfection in three double-blind, randomized, controlled Phase III studies. In STARTMRK, treatment-naïve patients received raltegravir 400 mg twice a day (bid) or efavirenz 600 mg at bedtime, both with tenofovir/emtricitabine. In BENCHMRK-1 and -2, highly treatment-experienced patients with multi-drug resistant virus and prior treatment failure received raltegravir 400 mg bid or placebo, both with optimized background therapy. Patients with chronic HBV and/or HCV coinfection were enrolled if baseline liver function tests were ≤5 times the upper limit of normal. HBV infection was defined as HBV surface antigen positivity for all studies; HCV infection was defined as HCV RNA positivity for STARTMRK and HCV antibody positivity for BENCHMRK. Hepatitis coinfection was present in 6% (34 of 563) of treatment-naïve patients (4% HBV only, 2% HCV only and 0.2% HBV+HCV) and 16% (114 of 699) of treatment-experienced patients (6% HBV only, 9% HCV only and 1% HBV+HCV). The incidence of drug-related adverse events was similar in raltegravir recipients with and without hepatitis coinfection in both STARTMRK (50 vs. 47%) and BENCHMRK (34 vs. 38.5%). Grade 2-4 liver enzyme elevations were more frequent in coinfected vs. monoinfected patients, but were not different between the raltegravir and control groups. At week 96, the proportion of raltegravir recipients with HIV RNA <50 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL was similar between coinfected and monoinfected patients (93 vs. 90% in STARTMRK; 63 vs. 61% in BENCHMRK). Raltegravir was generally well tolerated and efficacious up to 96 weeks in HIV-infected patients with HBV/HCV coinfection.

The effects of oral iron supplementation on the progression of anemia and renal dysfunction in patients with chronic kidney disease

Oral iron traditionally has been administered to patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, there are limited data on the effect of oral iron in CKD patients. Here, we evaluate the effects of oral iron therapy on renal anemia and progression of renal disease in CKD patients. Anemic patients with nondialytic CKD who were naive to erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) were recruited for the prospective observational study. The participants were classified into oral iron or control group, and they were asked to keep their treatment status for 1 year. The primary outcomes were change in Hb and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). A total of 182 participants were enrolled and 138 completed a 12-month follow-up. No change in Hb level was observed during the follow-up period in the iron group, whereas a significant decrease in Hb was observed in the control group. Oral iron supplementation was effective, especially in patients with eGFR < 30 ml/min/1.73 m2. The changes in eGFR did not differ between the two groups. The incidences of drug-related adverse events were equivalent in two groups. Oral iron supplementation might attenuate the progression of anemia in nondialytic CKD patients without ESAs and not impact kidney function.

Continued improvement in myocardial T2* over two years of deferasirox therapy in -thalassemia major patients with cardiac iron overload

The efficacy of cardiac iron chelation in transfusion-dependent patients has been demonstrated in one-year prospective trials. Since normalization of cardiac T2* takes several years, the efficacy and safety of deferasirox was assessed for two years in patients with β-thalassemia major in the cardiac sub-study of the EPIC trial. Eligible patients with myocardial T2* greater than 5 to less than 20 ms received deferasirox, with the primary endpoint being the change in T2* from baseline to two years. Baseline myocardial T2* was severe (> 5 to < 10 ms) in 39 patients, and moderate-to-mild (10 to < 20 ms) in 62 patients. Mean deferasirox dose was 33.1 ± 3.7 mg/kg/d in the one-year core study increasing to 36.1 ± 7.7 mg/kg/d during the second year of treatment. Geometric mean myocardial T2* increased from a baseline of 11.2 to 14.8 ms at two years (P < 0.001). In patients with moderate-to-mild baseline T2*, an increase was seen from 14.7 to 20.1 ms, with normalization (≥ 20 ms) in 56.7% of patients. In those with severe cardiac iron overload at baseline, 42.9% improved to the moderate-to-mild group. The incidence of drug-related adverse events did not increase during the extension relative to the core study and included (≥ 5%) increased serum creatinine, rash and increased alanine aminotransferase. Continuous treatment with deferasirox for two years with a target dose of 40 mg/kg/d continued to remove iron from the heart in patients with β-thalassemia major and mild, moderate and severe cardiac siderosis. (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT 00171821).

A phase II clinical study of interleukin-11 mutein to treat patients with chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia.

9113 Background: To demonstrate the safety and efficacy of genetically engineered human interleukin-11 mutein (mIL-11) on chemotherapy- induced thrombocytopenia (CIT) patients, a multicenter randomized controlled trial was conducted in China, comparing mIL-11 with the standard recombinant human interleukin-11 (rhIL-11, NEUMEGA) treatment in 83 cancer patients who had experienced platelet counts of ≤75,000/μL during the chemotherapy cycle immediately preceding study entry. Methods: Patients were randomized into either MR or RM group. Group MR represents the subcutaneous administration of mIL-11 (7.5 μ g/kg) once daily for 10 days beginning 72 hours after chemotherapy during a 21-day chemotherapy (cycle 1) followed by once daily subcutaneous administration of rhIL-11 in the clinical dose (25 μ g/kg) for 10 days (cycle 2). Group RM represents vice versa. In between cycle 1 and 2 for both groups, a 7-day wash-out period was assigned. Results: Intent-to-treat populations of mIL-11 (n=70) or rhIL-11 (n=76) were analyzed to evaluate the safety at all visits. Adverse events were mild or moderate, and the incidence of drug-related adverse events of mIL-11 (25.7%) were lower than those of rhIL-11 (40.8%) (p=0.07). None of Gr 3,4 unexpected adverse events nor death was observed during the study. In addition, no patients developed antibodies against the mIL-11 protein during the study. For the evaluation of efficacy, sixty patients were analyzed for their average platelet counts during the study. mIL-11 (7.5 μ g/kg) as well as rhIL- 11 (25 μ g/kg) were effective to increase the nadir platelet counts (62.58 ± 36.59 × 103/μL vs. 60.19 ± 32.09 × 103/μL for mIL-11 vs rhIL-11), as compared with the nontreated control group (40.98 ± 17.90 × 103/μ L) (p<0.0001). There was statistically no difference between mIL-11 and rhIL-11 for their efficacy, including average platelet counts (197.8 ± 123.6 × 103/μ L vs. 202.3 ± 118.9 × 103/μ L), and the platelet recovery rate during the study. Conclusions: mIL- 11 has equivalent thrombopoietic activity and is well tolerated at dose of 7.5 μg/kg, one-third dose of the clinical dose of rhIL-11 (25 μg/kg), suggesting the potential to reduce CIT in this model. Author Disclosure Employment or Leadership Position Consultant or Advisory Role Stock Ownership Honoraria Research Funding Expert Testimony Other Remuneration ViroMed Co., Ltd.

Safety and tolerability of sitagliptin in clinical studies: a pooled analysis of data from 10,246 patients with type 2 diabetes

BackgroundIn a previous pooled analysis of 12 double-blind clinical studies that included data on 6,139 patients with type 2 diabetes, treatment with sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor, was shown to be generally well tolerated compared with treatment with control agents. As clinical development of sitagliptin continues, additional studies have been completed, and more patients have been exposed to sitagliptin. The purpose of the present analysis is to update the safety and tolerability assessment of sitagliptin by pooling data from 19 double-blind clinical studies.MethodsThe present analysis included data from 10,246 patients with type 2 diabetes who received either sitagliptin 100 mg/day (N = 5,429; sitagliptin group) or a comparator agent (placebo or an active comparator) (N = 4,817; non-exposed group). The 19 studies from which this pooled population was drawn represent the double-blind, randomized studies that included patients treated with the usual clinical dose of sitagliptin (100 mg/day) for between 12 weeks and 2 years and for which results were available as of July 2009. These 19 studies assessed sitagliptin taken as monotherapy, initial combination therapy with metformin or pioglitazone, or as add-on combination therapy with other antihyperglycemic agents (metformin, pioglitazone, a sulfonylurea ± metformin, insulin ± metformin, or rosiglitazone + metformin). Patients in the non-exposed group were taking placebo, metformin, pioglitazone, a sulfonylurea ± metformin, insulin ± metformin, or rosiglitazone + metformin. The analysis used patient-level data from each study to evaluate between-group differences in the exposure-adjusted incidence rates of adverse events.ResultsSummary measures of overall adverse events were similar in the sitagliptin and non-exposed groups, except for an increased incidence of drug-related adverse events in the non-exposed group. Incidence rates of specific adverse events were also generally similar between the two groups, except for increased incidence rates of hypoglycemia, related to the greater use of a sulfonylurea, and diarrhea, related to the greater use of metformin, in the non-exposed group and constipation in the sitagliptin group. Treatment with sitagliptin was not associated with an increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events.ConclusionsIn this updated pooled safety analysis of data from 10,246 patients with type 2 diabetes, sitagliptin 100 mg/day was generally well tolerated in clinical trials of up to 2 years in duration.

Anticancer therapies and CNS relapse: overcoming blood–brain and blood–cerebrospinal fluid barrier impermeability

Prolonged survival with targeted therapies has sometimes come at the expense of an increased risk of CNS relapse; because many of these agents poorly penetrate the BBB, malignant cells may remain viable within the CNS. The ability of anticancer drugs to penetrate the BBB is a major consideration in the treatment of CNS parenchymal metastases. Optimal chemotherapy approaches for treating CNS metastases remain unclear due to a lack of evidence-based recommendations. Recent hypothesis-generating studies evaluating intra-cerebrospinal fluid administration of targeted agents indicate that these drugs may be effective in treating leptomeningeal disease and are associated with a low incidence of drug-related adverse events. Newer strategies for treating cerebrospinal fluid metastases may co-opt endogenous systems of the BBB, such as those involved in receptor-mediated transcytosis or classic carrier-mediated transporter systems to facilitate drug delivery across the BBB.

Meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of oral theophylline in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral theophylline versus placebo in patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The databases Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Chinese Biomedical Database were retrieved by using the key words "Uniphyl or Theophylline or Theo-Dur or theo or Theotrim or Elixophyllin or Elixophyllin or Phyllocontin or aminophylline or Methylxanthine or nuelin or doxofylline" and "obstructive or bronchitis or pulmonary emphysema or bronchial hyperreactivity or COPD or COLD or emphysema" so as to search the materials about the randomized controlled clinical trials comparing the effectiveness of stable COPD treated by oral theophylline and placebo. A meta-analysis was conducted. For continuous variables, the results of individual studies were pooled using fixed-effect weighted mean difference (WMD) with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Where the results were expressed as dichotomous variables, the relative risk (RR) with 95%CI was calculated. Thirty-four documents about randomized controlled clinical trials, including a total of 2087 patients, from the retrieved 2010 documents accorded to the demand of enrollment. The results of meta-analysis showed that theophylline significantly improved the forced expiratory volume in 1 s, forced vital capacity and peak expiratory flow rate (WMD 0.09 L, 95%CI 0.09 - 0.09; WMD 0.14 L, 95%CI 0.13 - 0.14; WMD 17.0 L/min and 95%CI 6.9 - 27.2 respectively). Arterial oxygen tension and arterial carbon dioxide tension at rest both improved with treatment (WMD 2.89 mm Hg, 95%CI 1.11 - 4.66; WMD -2.05 mm Hg and 95%CI -3.59 to -1.42 respectively). Six-minute walk distance significantly improved (WMD 38.89 meters, 95%CI 21.55 - 56.22) in treatment group. The RR of acute exacerbations was smaller between both groups (RR 0.74, 95%CI 0.59 - 0.93). The RR of total adverse events was similar (RR 1.05, 95%CI 0.95 - 1.16) while RR of drug-related adverse events was greater (RR 2.54, 95%CI 1.37 - 4.70). And there was significant statistical difference. Compared with the placebo, theophylline can improve lung function, arterial blood gas tensions and walking distance while the incidence of drug-related adverse events is higher.

Olmesartan Medoxomil plus Amlodipine Increases Efficacy in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Hypertension after Monotherapy

Hypertension remains a major global health problem, and evidence suggests that the majority of patients will require two or more antihypertensive agents in order to reach specified BP targets. Combining two drugs from different classes has the potential to target different aspects of hypertension, which may result in additional BP decreases compared with either agent used alone. This randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre trial in patients with moderate-to-severe hypertension (systolic BP [SBP]/diastolic BP [DBP] > or =160/100 mmHg) investigated the additional efficacy in BP reduction and BP goal rates (<140/90 mmHg for patients without diabetes mellitus, <130/80 mmHg for patients with diabetes) achieved by adding amlodipine 5 or 10 mg/day to olmesartan medoxomil (hereafter olmesartan) 20 mg/day in patients not adequately controlled on olmesartan monotherapy. After 8 weeks' open-label olmesartan 20 mg monotherapy, 538 patients with SBP/DBP > or =140/90 mmHg were randomized to 8 weeks' double-blind therapy with olmesartan/placebo, olmesartan/amlodipine 20 mg/5 mg or olmesartan/amlodipine 20 mg/10 mg. This trial is registered on the www.clinicaltrials.gov website (NCT00220220). After 8 weeks (with last observation carried forward), the adjusted mean change in seated DBP (SeDBP) from baseline was -7.6 mmHg for olmesartan/placebo, -10.4 mmHg for olmesartan/amlodipine 20 mg/5 mg (p = 0.0006 vs olmesartan/placebo) and -10.9 mmHg for olmesartan/amlodipine 20 mg/10 mg (p < 0.0001 vs olmesartan/placebo). Mean changes in SeSBP from baseline with olmesartan/amlodipine 20 mg/5 mg and olmesartan/amlodipine 20 mg/10 mg were -16.1 and -16.7 mmHg, respectively (p < 0.0001 for both dose regimens vs olmesartan/placebo). BP goal rates were significantly higher with olmesartan/amlodipine 20 mg/5 mg and olmesartan/amlodipine 20 mg/10 mg (44.5% and 45.8%, respectively; p = 0.0011 and p = 0.0004, respectively) versus olmesartan/placebo (28.5%). Combination therapy was well tolerated, and the incidence of drug-related adverse events was 8.9% for olmesartan/placebo, 7.7% for olmesartan/amlodipine 20 mg/5 mg, and 11.3% for olmesartan/amlodipine 20 mg/10 mg (p = 0.490). Most adverse events were mild in severity and were well known drug-class issues. Combining olmesartan and amlodipine resulted in significantly greater BP lowering in patients not achieving adequate BP control with olmesartan monotherapy, thus allowing a significantly greater proportion of patients to achieve BP goal.

Efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients with advanced clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with diabetes: Results from the phase III TARGET study

e16099 Background: Results of the phase III TARGET trial, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of sorafenib (SOR) treatment in pts with clear-cell RCC in whom 1 prior systemic therapy had failed, indicated that SOR is effective and safe for pts with advanced RCC, leading to the approval of SOR for the treatment of advanced RCC. Diabetes can be associated with increased morbidity during treatment in a variety of malignancies. Therefore, an exploratory subset analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SOR in pts enrolled in TARGET with or without diabetes at baseline. Methods: Pts (N=903) with advanced clear-cell RCC, ECOG PS 0–2, and low- or intermediate-risk MSKCC score were randomized 1:1 to SOR 400 mg BID or placebo (PBO). End points included OS, PFS, and safety. A planned independently-assessed formal analysis of PFS showed significant benefit for SOR over PBO; consequently, pts assigned to PBO were able to cross over to SOR. Results: Pt demographics were similar for all subsets. Pre- crossover data by subset are shown in the table . The incidence of drug-related adverse events (AEs) across subgroups was consistent with that for the overall population. In pts with vs without diabetes, treatment with SOR was not associated with increased hyperglycemia (1 pt/arm in the without diabetes subgroups only) or hypertension. Conclusions: The safety profile of SOR in pts with diabetes was comparable with that for the overall study population. SOR was well tolerated and AEs were manageable. Trends in improved PFS were observed for SOR regardless of baseline diabetes status; however, the small diabetic subset limits interpretation of a SOR OS benefit in this subpopulation. *Final PFS of overall study population based on independent review from Jan 2005; all other data from May 2005 database [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

Re-Treatment with Omalizumab at One Year Interval for Japanese Cedar Pollen-Induced Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis Is Effective and Well Tolerated

Background: Seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) induced by Japanese cedar pollens is a serious problem in Japan. Omalizumab, a humanized monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, improves symptoms associated with SAR, but a study comprehensively investigating the clinical efficacy, safety and pharmacological effects of omalizumab re-treatment has not yet been conducted. Methods: The open-label, 12-week study was carried out in 34 patients who had been treated with omalizumab in the core study conducted in the previous Japanese cedar pollen season. The study plan including study period, efficacy and safety endpoints, as well as dose regimen, was designed to be the same as in the core study. Omalizumab was administered subcutaneously every 2 or 4 weeks based on the serum IgE level and body weight of each patient. Results: Time course changes in daily nasal symptom medication scores as well as in daily ocular symptom medication scores throughout the pollen period were comparable with those in the omalizumab group in the core study. Serum free IgE levels decreased to below the target level in all patients and were equal to those in the omalizumab group in the core study. The adverse reaction profiles were similar to those in the core study. In addition, the overall incidence of drug-related adverse events and injection site reactions in the re-treatment study did not increase compared with those in the omalizumab group in the core study. There were no serious adverse events, and no anti-omalizumab antibodies were detected. Conclusion: Omalizumab was effective and safe when consecutively readministered in the second Japanese cedar pollen season.

Clinical evaluation of oral levofloxacin 500mg once-daily dosage for treatment of lower respiratory tract infections and urinary tract infections: a prospective multicenter study in China

Levofloxacin (LVFX), a fluoroquinolone agent, has a broad spectrum that covers Gram-positive and -negative bacteria and atypical pathogens. It demonstrates good clinical efficacy in the treatment of various infections, including lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) and urinary tract infections (UTIs). To evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral LVFX 500 mg once daily, a large open-label clinical trial was conducted in 1266 patients (899 with LRTIs and 367 with UTIs) at 32 centers in China. In the per-protocol population, the clinical efficacy rate (cure or improvement) at 7 to 14 days after the end of treatment was 96.4% (666/691) for LRTIs and 95.7% (267/279) for UTIs. In 53 patients diagnosed with atypical pneumonia the treatment was effective. The bacteriological efficacy rate was 96.6% (256/265) for LRTIs and 93.3% (126/135) for UTIs. The eradication rate of the causative pathogens was 100% (33/33) for Haemophilus influenzae and 96.0% (24/25) for Streptococcus pneumoniae in LRTIs, and 94.1% (80/85) for Escherichia coli in UTIs. The overall efficacy rates were 89.3% (617/691) for LRTIs and 87.8% (245/279) for UTIs. The incidence of drug-related adverse events (ADRs) was 17.3% (215/1245), and the incidence of drug-related laboratory abnormalities was 15.7% (191/1213). Common ADRs were dizziness, nausea, and insomnia. Common laboratory abnormalities included "WBC decreased", "alanine aminotransferase (ALT) increased", "aspartate aminotransferase (AST) increased", and "lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) increased". All of these events were mentioned in the package inserts of fluoroquinolones including LVFX, and most events were mild and transient. Thirty-four patients (2.7%) were withdrawn from the study because of the ADRs. No new ADRs were found. This study concluded that the dosage regimen of LVFX 500 mg once daily was effective and tolerable for the treatment of LRTIs and UTIs.