Safety Of Combination Therapy Research Articles

Efficacy and safety of various drug combinations in treating plaque Psoriasis: A meta-analysis

Background Psoriasis, a chronic inflammatory disease affecting the skin, joints, and nails (2-3% worldwide), significantly affects quality of life. Genetic and environmental factors also play key roles. Topical corticosteroids, calcineurin inhibitors, and oral corticosteroids help to manage plaque psoriasis symptoms, but combination therapies might offer greater effectiveness and improved safety profiles. These combinations could potentially reduce medication dosages and side effects in patients. Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of various drug combinations over conventional monotherapies in the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, which incorporates palmoplantar psoriasis and psoriasis vulgaris, by discovering and utilizing research articles comprising the same or similar variables as PASI 75 and evaluating the information using RevMan v5.4.1. Method We reviewed the efficacy and safety of combination therapy vs. monotherapy/placebo for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis (palmoplantar and vulgaris) using PASI 75 via RevMan v5.4.1. Risk of bias assessment and funnel plots were employed to assess the heterogeneity of each paper. Inclusion criteria – Publications < 20yrs, RCTs, plaque/palmoplantar/psoriasis vulgaris; exclusion criteria – Guttate/arthritic psoriasis, pediatric and pregnant individuals, publications > 20 yrs. Results Seventeen studies were analyzed, comprising a total of 2291 patients (n=1147 with combination regimens and n=1144 with control regimen in the analysis). A significant PASI 75- response was observed in the pioglitazone combination subgroup as compared to placebo (OR=4.92,95% CI 2.19-11.05, P = 0.0001); methotrexate combination subgroup as compared to placebo (OR=2.56, 95% CI 1.67-3.94, P< 0.0001) test of subgroup differences showed P= 0.14, I2= 34%. Incidence rate of abnormality in levels of liver enzymes (OR=1.89,9.5% CI 6.69-5.22, P=0.22), nausea (OR=1.28,95% CI 0.77-2.14, P=0.34), headache (OR=1.28,95% CI 0.77-2.14, P=0.58), fatigue (OR=0.89, 95% CI 0.41-1.90, P=0.45).] Conclusion This study showed that combination therapy is very effective for plaque psoriasis, with promising combinations of pioglitazone. While safety seems similar between the groups, larger studies are needed to determine the long-term effects. These findings suggest that personalized treatment plans could improve outcomes; however, confirmation through larger trials is crucial before wider use. This opens doors to research on optimal combinations for individual patients.

Abstract PO2-05-12: Retrospective analysis on therapeutic efficacy and predictive indicators of eribulin plus anti-angiogenic drugs for metastatic breast cancer

Abstract Background: Eribulin has been widely used for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). It has been found that eribulin can work in synergy with Bevacizumab or Anlotinib to achieve anti-angiogenic effects and possible synergistic enhancement. To optimize the efficacy of eribulin usage in late-line MBC patients, it is essential to delve deeper into the effects of combined treatments and gather more real-world clinical outcomes. Therefore, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of eribulin plus the anti-angiogenic drugs in late-line MBC patients. Objective: This study aims to retrospectively analyze the therapeutic efficacy and safety of eribulin plus anti-angiogenic drugs in treating metastatic breast cancer and explore predictive indicators of the therapeutic efficacy of eribulin in treating MBC. Methods: A retrospective review study was performed. 40 Patients diagnosed with MBC and treated with eribulin in Xi’an international medical center hospital from May 2020 to May 2021 were enrolled in this study. Patients were evaluable for this study and divided into two groups based on whether they received eribulin monotherapy or combined therapy. 22 patients were treated with eribulin monotherapy, and 18 were treated with eribulin and anti-angiogenic drugs (Bevacizumab and Anlotinib). Patients’ treatment parameters and characteristics were recorded. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate the median PFS and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI), and the Cox regression model was used for multivariate analysis of predictive indicators. The Fisher exact probability test was used to compare the difference in adverse reactions between the two groups, with a level of significance set at p-value < 0.05. Results: All study patients have an average of 5 treatment lines and a median progression-free survival (mPFS) of 4.2 months. The eribulin plus anti-angiogenic drug treatment group had a significantly prolonged mPFS compared to the group without anti-angiogenic drug treatment (7.0 months vs 2.0 months, p < 0.001, log-rank). Multivariate analysis identified that the combination of anti-angiogenic therapy (HR = 0.043, p = 0.004) and the occurrence of grade 3-4 neutropenia after treatment were two predictive factors for longer PFS (HR = 0.322, p = 0.009). In contrast, prior resistance to taxanes was predictive of shorter PFS (HR = 4.583, p = 0.019). Other factors, including age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, hormone receptor (HR) type, expression status, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER-2) expression status, Ki-67 level, number of metastatic lesions, and number of prior lines of Eribulin therapy, were not significantly associated with PFS. The results of Fisher’s exact test show that there was no significant increase in treatment-related adverse events (all grades) after combination with anti-angiogenic drugs. Conclusion: A combination of eribulin and anti-angiogenic therapy has significantly prolonged mPFS in the treatment of MBC patients. Other factors such as prior non-taxane resistance, grade 3-4 neutropenia occurrence after treatment, and combined anti-angiogenic therapy can be used as biomarkers for predicting treatment efficacy. The adverse events are manageable and the safety of combined therapy can be guaranteed. Therefore, the eribulin plus anti-angiogenic combination may act as a potential therapy for late-line MBC patients with clinically beneficial therapeutic effects. Keywords: metastatic breast cancer, eribulin, anti-angiogenic therapy, retrospective analysis Citation Format: Junmei Zhang, Xuezheng Wang, Hongjuan Du, Yan Xue. Retrospective analysis on therapeutic efficacy and predictive indicators of eribulin plus anti-angiogenic drugs for metastatic breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO2-05-12.

Adding Letrozole to Growth Hormone and Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Analog Increases Height in Girls With Short Stature: A Hospital Record–Based Retrospective Study

ObjectiveThere have been rare data on letrozole for height improvement in girls. This study aimed to clarify the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with recombinant human growth hormone (rhGH), gonadotropin-releasing hormone analog (GnRHa), and letrozole in improving the height of girls with short stature and advanced bone age. MethodsThis was a hospital record–based retrospective study. Follow-up was conducted on girls with short stature who received treatment with rhGH, GnRHa, and letrozole at outpatient clinics in our hospital. The treatment group included a total of 29 participants. Before treatment, the mean age of the patients was 11.17 years, and the mean treatment duration was 17.31 months. The control group consisted of 29 short-statured girls who received rhGH/GnRHa treatment, with the mean age and treatment duration of 12.43 years and 16.59 months, respectively. ResultsThe predicted adult heights (PAHs) before and after treatment were 155.38 and 161.32 cm (P < .001). The ΔPAH in the treatment group was 4 cm higher than that in the control group (5.85 vs 1.82 cm, P < .001). Significant differences were noted in the height standard deviation scores of bone age (P < .001) and chronological age (P = .003) before and after treatment. There was an increasing body mass index during therapy (P = .039). The height gain was 8.71 ± 4.46 cm, and the growth rate was 6.78 ± 3.84 cm per year. ConclusionCombined treatment with GH, GnRHa, and letrozole can enhance the adult height and PAH in short-statured girls, and no significant side effects have been reported.

Efficacy and Safety of Combination Therapy with Low-Dose Rivaroxaban in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Objectives: To review the evidence on the effectiveness and safety of low-dose-rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily (LDR) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and/or peripheral artery disease (PAD) taking antiplatelets. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Efficacy endpoints were cardiovascular events (CVEs), myocardial infarction, stroke, all-cause, and cardiovascular death. Any, major, fatal bleeding, and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) were safety endpoints. Numbers needed to treat (NNT), and numbers needed to harm (NNH) were also calculated. Results: Seven RCTs were included with 45,836 patients: 34,276 with CAD and 11,560 with PAD. Overall, 4247 CVEs and 3082 bleedings were registered. LDR in association with either any antiplatelet drug or aspirin (ASA) alone reduced the risk of CVEs (hazard ratio [HR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 0.78-0.94) and ischemic stroke (HR 0.68, 95%CI 0.55-0.84). LDR + ASA increased the risk of major bleeding (HR 1.71, 95%CI 1.38-2.11) but no excess of fatal bleeding or ICH was found. The NNT to prevent one CVE for LDR + ASA was 63 (43-103) and the NNH to cause major bleeding was 107 (77-193). Conclusions: The combination of LDR with either antiplatelet drugs or low-dose aspirin reduces CVEs and ischemic stroke in patients with CAD/PAD. There was an increased risk of major bleeding but no excess of fatal or ICH was found. LDR seems to have a favorable net clinical benefit compared to ASA treatment alone.

The abscopal effect: mechanism of occurrence and prospects of using it in therapy of metastatic cancer

The abscopal effect in oncology has been known for 70 years, but until recently its clinical significance was rather low. The development of immune response checkpoint inhibitors has led to an active study of this phenomenon. There is now evidence of improved survival among patients, in whom the abscopal effect has been documented, opening new perspectives for the treatment of cancers at different stages. This review presents data on the mechanisms of the abscopal effect, experimental and clinical data, current limitations and possible perspectives. The aim of the study was to investigate the current concept of the abscopal effect occurrence and to evaluate the prospects of using the abscopal effect in therapy of metastatic cancer. Material and Methods. We searched publications in Pubmed system from 2010 to 2023. Of 286 publications, 72 were used for writing the review. Results. In the era of widespread use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for cancer therapy, the abscopal effect appears to be an effective therapeutic approach with broad prospects of application in the treatment of patients with metastatic cancer. Conclusion. The incidence of the abscopal effect has increased with the advent of immune therapy, and the use of ICIs with radiation therapy (RT) has shown improved survival even in patients with advanced disease. More research is needed to establish standardized treatment protocols, including the optimal dose and timing of RT, as well as the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with different classes of ICIs. Further search for clinical and laboratory abscopal effect predictors, which could allow personalized treatment approaches, is required.

Efficacy and safety of VEGF/VEGFR inhibitors for platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BackgroundAlmost all patients with ovarian cancer will experience relapse and eventually develop platinum-resistant. The poor prognosis and limited treatment options have prompted the search for novel approaches in managing platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC). Therefore, a meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) /VEGF receptor (VEGFR) inhibitors for PROC.MethodsA comprehensive search of online databases was conducted to identify randomized clinical trials published until December 31, 2022. Pooled hazard ratios (HR) was calculated for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), while pooled odds ratio (OR) was calculated for objective response rate (ORR) and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Subgroup analysis was further performed to investigate the source of heterogeneity.ResultsIn total, 1097 patients from eight randomized clinical trials were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled HRs of OS (HR = 0.72; 95% CI: 0.62–0.84, p < 0.0001) and PFS (HR = 0.52; 95% CI: 0.45–0.59, p < 0.0001) demonstrated a significant prolongation in the combination group compared to chemotherapy alone for PROC. In addition, combination therapy demonstrated a superior ORR compared to monotherapy (OR = 2.34; 95%CI: 1.27–4.32, p < 0.0001). Subgroup analysis indicated that the combination treatment of VEGF/VEGFR inhibitors and chemotherapy was significantly more effective than monochemotherapy in terms of OS (HR = 0.71; 95% CI: 0.61–0.84, p < 0.0001), PFS (HR = 0.49; 95% CI: 0.42–0.57, p < 0.0001), and ORR (OR = 2.97; 95% CI: 1.89–4.67, p < 0.0001). Although the combination therapy was associated with higher incidences of hypertension, mucositis, proteinuria, diarrhea, and hand-foot syndrome compared to monochemotherapy, these toxicities were manageable and well-tolerated.ConclusionsThe meta-analysis demonstrated that combination therapy with VEGF/VEGFR inhibitors yielded better clinical outcomes for patients with PROC compared to monochemotherapy, especially when combined with chemotherapy. This analysis provides more treatment options for patients with PROC.Systematic review registration[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO], Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), identifier: CRD42023402050.

Efficacy and safety of combination therapy with pirfenidone and nintedanib in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

Background: Recent studies have suggested that combination therapy with pirfenidone and nintedanib is safe and tolerable in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). However, data from real-world practice are limited. Thus, we aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of this combination therapy in patients with IPF in a real-world setting. Methods: A multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted to investigate the safety and efficacy of combination therapy with pirfenidone and nintedanib in 45 patients with IPF. Incidences of adverse events and rates of lung function decline were compared before and after the combination therapy. Propensity score matching was performed to compare the outcomes between the combination and monotherapy groups. Results: The mean age of the patients was 68.8years, and 82.2% of them were male. The median follow-up duration after combination therapy was 12.1months. The majority of the patients (97.8%) received nintedanib as an add-on to pirfenidone. The most common adverse events after the combination therapy were diarrhea and anorexia. Pirfenidone or nintedanib was stopped in 12 patients owing to gastrointestinal AEs, lung transplantation, or financial problems. In patients with serial lung function data, the rate of decline in the forced vital capacity was significantly reduced after the combination therapy. In the matched analysis, the combination group had a higher incidence of diarrhea than the monotherapy group without an increase in serious adverse events; however, the two groups had similar changes in forced vital capacity (FVC). Conclusion: The combination of pirfenidone and nintedanib in patients with IPF has the potential to reduce the rate of FVC decline. However, in the matched analysis, FVC decline was comparable between the patients on combination therapy and those on monotherapy. The incidence of certain adverse events, particularly diarrhea, was higher with combination therapy, but serious adverse events were similar between the groups.

Effect of Hetrombopag Combined with Rhtpo in Patients with Severe Immune Thrombocytopenia

Background: Severe Immune Thrombocytopenia (ITP) is a life-threatening acquired hemorrhagic disease with dramatically decreased platelet number and clinical bleeding symptoms. Some patients with severe ITP did not respond to first-line treatment including steroids and Intravenous Immunoglobulin (IVIG). It was critical for them to use effective treatments to promote platelet and reduce the risk of fatal bleeding. Clinical practice guidelines have recommended the use of thrombopoietin receptor agonist (TPO-RA) as a second-line treatment for ITP. Recombinant human thrombopoietin (rhTPO) and hetrombopag are two distinct TPO-RAs with different mechanisms. As reported, there remains no study assessing the efficacy and safety of hetrombopag combined with rhTPO in the treatment of ITP. Therefore, the present study aimed to investigate the efficacy of hetrombopag plus rhTPO in Chinese patients with severe ITP, focusing on the short rather than the long-term efficacy, such as quickly increasing platelet count and significantly reducing bleeding, which would be more meaningful for severe patients whose platelet count &amp;lt;10 × 10 9/L. Methods: This was a prospective, open-label, single-center study with a planned enrollment of 30 patients. The inclusion criteria were patients ≥ 18 years, diagnosed with primary immune thrombocytopenia, platelet count &amp;lt;10 × 10 9/L, or bleeding score ≥ 5. Patients receiving other ITP drugs as maintenance therapy were eligible if previous glucocorticoid therapy doses were stable, and rituximab was used for at least 2 months and other immunosuppressants were stable for at least 4 weeks. Patients who had received IVIG, avatrombopag, eltrombopag, or romiplostim within 2 weeks prior to enrollment were excluded. Histories of platelet transfusion one week before treatment were excluded. Hetrombopag was given at 5 mg/day for 28 days, while rhTPO was administered at 300 U/kg subcutaneously daily for 14 days. When PLT &amp;gt; 100 × 10 9/L, rhTPO should be discontinued. When PLT &amp;gt; 150 × 10 9/L, the dosage of hetrombopag was reduced to 2.5mg/day, and it would be discontinued if PLT &amp;gt; 250 × 10 9/L. The primary endpoints were proportion of subjects with platelet count ≥30×10 9/L and at least doubled the baseline platelet count within 28 days. Secondary endpoints included bleeding score, incidence of thrombotic events, and adverse events (AEs). Results: As to July 27, 2023, a total of 20 patients were included in this study, with a median age of 36 years and a male proportion of 50%. Among them, 70% (14 cases) were newly diagnosed ITP patients. 50% of patients have received ≥ 1 line of previous treatment, of which 2 patients have received IVIG treatment and both have achieved CR (PLT ≥ 100 × 10 9/L). The baseline median platelet count was 5 × 10 9/L, and 95% (19 cases) of patients had active bleeding with a bleeding score of ≥ 1 point. The median duration for hetrombopag at dose of 5mg is 8.0 days, and rhTPO is 6.5 days. After combined treatment, the median time for platelet counts reached 30, 50, and 100 × 10 9/L was 4.5 days, 6 days, and 7 days, respectively. Among them, the median platelet count reached 103 × 10 9/L after 7 days treatment and 214.5 × 10 9/L after 15 days. Within 15 days of combined treatment, 15% (3 cases) of patients achieved partial platelet reaction (PLT &amp;gt; 50 × 10 9/L, without bleeding), and 85% (17 cases) achieved complete platelet reaction (PLT &amp;gt; 100 × 10 9/L, without bleeding). In terms of safety, two patients experienced liver function abnormalities, both of which were grade 1-2. One was related to treatment drugs, and the other was associated with underlying autoimmune liver disease. No thrombotic events occurred in all patients. Conclusion: This study innovatively explores the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with hetrombopag and rhTPO in the treatment of severe ITP. It is preliminarily confirmed that this combination therapy can effectively and quickly improve the early platelet response of ITP patients, avoid bleeding damage, and is expected to become a new treatment choice for severe ITP patients. We also look forward to the overall efficacy evaluation results of all patients after completing treatment in the future.

Comparison of Efficacy and Safety between Carboplatin-Etoposide and Cisplatin-Etoposide Combination Therapy in Patients with Advanced Neuroendocrine Carcinoma: A Retrospective Study

Introduction: Neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) is characterized by a poor prognosis and is generally treated with platinum and etoposide combination therapy as first-line chemotherapy. However, it remains uncertain whether carboplatin and etoposide combination therapy (CE) and cisplatin and etoposide combination therapy (PE) have comparable treatment efficacy. In this retrospective analysis, we compared the efficacy and safety of CE and PE in patients with NEC. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the patient’s clinical record from 2005 to 2022 at the Department of Medical Oncology, Tohoku University Hospital. Patients who received either CE or PE were included in the study. Statistical analyses were performed using JMP Pro 16.0 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA). Results: A total of 104 patients were enrolled, with 73 patients assigned to the CE group and 31 patients assigned to the PE group. Statistically, the response rate, progression-free survival time and overall survival time were 42.6%, 5.1 months (95% CI: 3.5–6.3) and 13.6 months (95% CI: 8.9–17.4), respectively, in the CE groups and 44.4%, 5.6 months (95% CI: 3.1–7.0) and 12.5 months (95% CI: 11.2–14.6), respectively, in the PE groups. There was no significant difference in treatment efficacy between the CE and the PE groups. However, the number of patients with elevated creatinine (3.35 mg/dL and 3.88 mg/dL in 2 patients, respectively) was significantly higher in the PE group than in the CE group. Conclusion: The efficacy of CE and PE in patients with NEC is comparable. However, the incidence of renal dysfunction was found to be significantly higher in the PE group than in the CE group.

Sickle cell disease: combination new therapies vs. CRISPR-Cas9 potential and challenges - review article.

In 2022, sickle cell disease (SCD) continues to affect the lives of millions of people, being one of the most frequently inherited blood disorders worldwide. Recently, several new therapies have been FDA approved for the treatment of SCD. The complexity of the pathophysiology of sickling has given opportunity to the evolution of several modalities of therapies. Nonetheless, the potential for complementary targeting of HbS polymerization, vasocclusion, and other inflammatory pathways remains controversial. None of these drugs can be considered a single curative line of treatment. With the advancement of CRISPR/Cas9 technology, autologous transplant of gene-edited hematopoietic stem cells could possibly provide a cure for most patients with SCD. The advantage of this approach over the conventional stem cell transplantation is that it decreases the need for immuno-suppressive drugs and the risk of graft-versus-host disease. In addition, recent technological advances can reduce the off-target effects, but long-term monitoring is needed to ensure the reliability of these methods in the clinical setting. This review explores the efficacy and safety of combination therapies and contrasting this alternative with the challenges that exist with sickle cell gene therapy using CRISPR.

A retrospective study of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with lenvatinib compared with TACE monotherapy for BCLC B2 stage hepatocellular carcinoma.

The present study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with lenvatinib (Len) plus transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and TACE alone in patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) B2 stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A total of 66 patients with BCLC B2 stage HCC were retrospectively reviewed in the present study, of which 34 patients received Len + TACE, while 32 patients received TACE alone between May 2018 and May 2020. Survival outcome, tumor response and adverse events (AEs) were compared between the two treatment groups. The 6-month, 1- and 2-year overall survival (OS) rates were significantly higher in the Len + TACE group (97.1, 85.3 and 76.3%, respectively) compared with those in the TACE group [(93.8, 81.1 and 45.4%, respectively); hazard ratio (HR), 0.395; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.180-0.867; P=0.023], but no significant difference in progression-free survival rate was observed between the two groups (HR, 0.815; 95% CI, 0.437-1.520; P=0.510). Patients receiving Len + TACE demonstrated a higher objective response rate compared with those receiving TACE alone (64.7 vs. 34.4%; P=0.014). Therefore, Len + TACE combination therapy was associated with increased OS and tumor response compared with that of TACE monotherapy in patients with BCLC B2 stage HCC. However, large-scale, multicenter, prospective studies are needed to further confirm these results.

Real-World Experience of the Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Combination Therapy with Remdesivir and Monoclonal Antibodies versus Remdesivir Alone for Patients with Mild-to-Moderate COVID-19 and Immunosuppression: A Retrospective Single-Center Study in Aichi, Japan.

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic continues to threaten global public health. Remdesivir and monoclonal antibodies have shown promise for COVID-19 treatment of patients who are immunocompromised, including those with cancer, transplant recipients, and those with autoimmune disorder. However, the effectiveness and safety of this combination therapy for patients who are immunosuppressed remain unclear. We compared the efficacy and safety of combination therapy and remdesivir monotherapy for patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 who were immunosuppressed. Eighty-six patients treated in July 2021-March 2023 were analyzed. The combination therapy group (CTG) showed a statistically significant reduction in viral load compared with the monotherapy group (MTG) (p < 0.01). Patients in the CTG also experienced earlier resolution of fever than those in the MTG (p = 0.02), although this difference was not significant in the multivariate analysis (p = 0.21). Additionally, the CTG had significantly higher discharge rates on days 7, 14, and 28 than the MTG (p < 0.01, p < 0.01, and p = 0.04, respectively). No serious adverse events were observed with combination therapy. These findings suggest that combination therapy may improve the clinical outcomes of immunosuppressed COVID-19 patients by reducing the viral load and hastening recovery. Further studies are required to fully understand the benefits of this combination therapy for immunocompromised COVID-19 patients.

Efficacy and safety of combinational therapy using topical minoxidil and microneedling for the treatment of androgenetic alopecia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Androgenetic alopecia is a widespread condition that is the most common type of hair loss affecting approximately 58% and 40% of men and women by the age of 50, respectively. Patients have been known to experience severe distress due to androgenetic alopecia, including anxiety, low self-esteem, and depression. The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the efficacy of combination therapy using topical minoxidil and microneedling compared to topical minoxidil alone. This systematic review of randomized controlled trials was carried out using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. The literature search was performed using Scopus, Cochrane, Embase, and the National Institutes of Health's United States National Library of Medicine from inception through January 20, 2023. Randomized controlled trials examining the efficacy of combinational therapy and monotherapy using microneedling and minoxidil on patients with clinically diagnosed androgenetic alopecia were included after screening titles, abstracts, and full texts. Two independent reviewers selected studies, extracted data, and appraised the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool. Ten randomized controlled trials, including 466 patients, were selected for this review and eight studies were ultimately included in the meta-analysis. All eight studies displayed a statistically significant increase in total hair count [standard mean difference (SMD) 1.76; 95% CI 1.26-2.26; P < 0.00001]; however, the evidence did not support a statistically significant increase in hair diameter (SMD 0.82; 95% CI -0.01 to 1.65; P = 0.05). No scarring nor serious adverse events were reported in any of the studies. The findings of this meta-analysis strongly support the utilization of a multimodal therapeutic approach of minoxidil and microneedling for hair growth in patients with androgenetic alopecia. However, variations in factors such as rating scale measurements, microneedling methods, and areas of treatment may have resulted in confounding. Further randomized controlled, large-sample trials employing rigorous methodologies are needed to gain a more comprehensive understanding regarding treatment efficacy, namely the impact of combinational therapy on hair diameter.Clinical trial registrations This study follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and is registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database (CRD42023391164) and the International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (INPLASY) database (INPLASY202310031).

Treatment approaches for FGFR-altered urothelial carcinoma: targeted therapies and immunotherapy.

The treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma has dramatically changed over the past decade with the approval of several therapies from multiple drug classes including immune checkpoint inhibitors, targeted therapies, and antibody drug conjugates. Although next generation sequencing of urothelial carcinoma has revealed multiple recurring mutations, only one targeted therapy has been developed and approved to date. Erdafitinib, a pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitor, has been approved for treating patients with select FGFR2 and FGFR3 alterations and fusions since 2019. Since then, emerging data has demonstrated efficacy of combining erdafitinib with immunotherapy in treating FGFR-altered urothelial carcinoma. Ongoing trials are evaluating the use of erdafitinib in non-muscle invasive urothelial carcinoma as well as in combination with enfortumab vedotin in the metastatic setting, while other FGFR targeted agents such as infigratinib, AZD4547, rogaratinib and pemigatinib continue to be in development. Future challenges will include strategies to overcome FGFR acquired resistance and efficacy and safety of combination therapies with erdafitinib and other FGFR targeted agents.

Laboratory monitoring of the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with atorvastatin and ezetimib in patients with myocardial infarction

Laboratory monitoring of the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with atorvastatin and ezetimib in patients with myocardial infarction

Prevalence of Immunomodulator Use as Combination Therapy With Vedolizumab or Ustekinumab in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

The benefit of adding an immunomodulator to vedolizumab and ustekinumab remains unclear and may compromise the safety of these biologics. We evaluated the prevalence and predictors of immunomodulator use with vedolizumab or ustekinumab in patients with inflammatory bowel disease in a large longitudinal cohort. Clinical information was ascertained from electronic medical records of patients enrolled in TARGET-IBD, a prospective longitudinal observational cohort of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) at 34 sites. The prevalence of immunomodulator use with vedolizumab, ustekinumab, and antitumor necrosis factor therapies and predictors of immunomodulator use with vedolizumab and ustekinumab were estimated. Rates of combination therapy were additionally stratified by time from drug approval. Four thousand thirty-nine adults with IBD were identified, of whom 18.8% were treated with vedolizumab and 13.0% were treated with ustekinumab. Combination therapy with vedolizumab and ustekinumab exceeded 30% (30.7% and 36.2%, respectively) and was more likely in those with perianal disease or previous biologic exposure. Age and presence of extraintestinal manifestations did not consistently predict the use of an immunomodulator. Combination therapy decreased in the years after drug approval. Combination therapy with vedolizumab or ustekinumab was common and was associated with perianal disease and greater exposure to other biologics, although the practice is decreasing with time. Further data are needed to determine the efficacy and safety of combination therapy in patients initiating vedolizumab or ustekinumab for IBD.

Efficacy and Safety of Combination Therapy with Tadalafil and Sertraline for Premature Ejaculation: A Double-blind Randomized Controlled Trial

Background and Objective: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are effective in patients with premature ejaculation (PE), but the effect of combination therapy with tadalafil as a phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor (PDE5I) and sertraline (an SSRI) in these patients has been less studied. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of tadalafil with sertraline compared with sertraline and placebo. Materials and Methods: 107 patients with lifelong PE and no erectile dysfunction (ED) and an intravaginal ejaculation latency time (IELT) of less than 60s were treated for 6 weeks. Subjects were randomly divided into two groups: the placebo group (n=51) and the tadalafil group (n=51), who received sertraline 50 mg daily plus placebo on demand or sertraline 50 mg daily plus tadalafil 10 mg on demand . Premature ejaculation profile (PEP) and IELT were used to evaluate PE. The change in mean IELT, mean change in all four measures of PEP, and adverse effects in 2 groups were recorded. Results: Mean IELT before and after treatment was 35 .29sand 87 .55s, respectively, in the placebo group (P&lt;0 ,0001) and 40 .1s and 153.63s, respectively, in the tadalafil group (P&lt;0 .0001). Mean IELT improved significantly in the tadalafil group compared with the placebo group (113.53s vs. 52.25s, P&lt;0.0001). All four measures of PEP scores also improved in the tadalafil group compared with the placebo group. Drug-related adverse events occurred more frequently in group B than in group A. Conclusion: Combination therapy with tadalafil and sertraline in the treatment of premature ejaculation is more effective than sertraline alone despite more side effects.

#3318 PHASE II DOSE-SELECTION, RANDOMISED DOUBLE-BLIND TRIAL OF THE ASI, BI 690517, ALONE AND IN COMBINATION WITH EMPA IN PEOPLE WITH CKD

Abstract Background and Aims Elevated aldosterone levels are associated with chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression and adverse kidney and cardiovascular disease outcomes. Therapy with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) improves clinical outcomes, yet elevated aldosterone levels often persist. BI 690517 is a first-in-class, selective aldosterone synthase inhibitor (ASi) that may reduce deleterious mineralocorticoid receptor-dependent and -independent actions of aldosterone. Coadministration of BI 690517 with a sodium–glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor could mitigate the risk of hyperkalaemia. This study is investigating the efficacy and safety of three doses of BI 690517, alone and in combination with empagliflozin (EMPA), on top of an ACEi or ARB, for treatment of CKD with or without type 2 diabetes. Method A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-dose Phase II trial (NCT05182840) in adults with or without type 2 diabetes who had an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥30 and &amp;lt;90 mL/min/1.73 m2, urine albumin:creatinine ratio (UACR) ≥200 and &amp;lt;5000 mg/g, and serum potassium ≤4.8 mmol/L on stable background therapy with an ACEi or ARB. After an 8-week run-in period to assigned background therapy (EMPA 10 mg or matched placebo randomised 1:1), participants were randomised 1:1:1:1 to BI 690517 (low, medium or high dose) or matched placebo for 14 weeks. Primary outcome was the change in UACR measured in a first morning void (UACRFMV) from baseline to Week 14. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of participants with ≥15 and 30% decreases in UACRFMV. Safety outcomes and changes in eGFR and serum potassium were also evaluated. Results Recruitment is complete, with 1719 participants from 168 sites in 29 countries screened. In total, 714 were randomised and entered the run-in period (last randomisation on 30 December 2022). The trial is currently ongoing; data on baseline characteristics will become available and shared. Conclusion This study will provide key data on the potential synergistic kidney-protective effects and safety of combination therapy with BI 690517 plus EMPA, as well as data on monotherapy, for CKD with or without type 2 diabetes. Findings will inform BI 690517 dose selection for further clinical trial development.

ARC-10: A phase 3 study to evaluate zimberelimab + domvanalimab versus pembrolizumab in front-line, PD-L1-high, locally advanced or metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer.

TPS9148 Background: Despite improvements in the management of locally advanced or metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from programmed cell death/ligand protein 1 (PD-[L]1) inhibition, there remains an unmet need for improved treatment options. PD-L1 expression is a known biomarker of response to anti–PD-L1 therapies in metastatic NSCLC. The combination of PD-1 inhibition with inhibition of the immunosuppressive T cell Immunoglobulin and ITIM domain (TIGIT) pathway is associated with improved response and prolonged progression-free survival in patients with advanced NSCLC. Domvanalimab (dom) is an Fc-silent humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody (mAb) that blocks TIGIT, thereby reducing immunosuppression of T/natural killer (NK) cells and promoting antitumor activity. Zimberelimab (zim) is an mAb that binds to PD-1 on T/NK cells, preventing PD-L1-mediated immunosuppressive effects and resulting in tumor cell death. This phase 3 study will investigate the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with dom + zim compared with pembrolizumab monotherapy in patients with PD-L1-high NSCLC. Methods: ARC-10 (NCT04736173) is a global, phase 3, randomized, multicenter, open-label study. Eligible patients are adults with histologically confirmed, treatment-naive, locally advanced or metastatic, squamous or non-squamous NSCLC with ≥1 measurable lesion(s) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1, high expression of PD-L1 (tumor cells [TC] ≥50%), and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1. Patients must not have genomic tumor aberrations for which targeted therapies are approved and available (eg, EGFR, ALK, ROS, BRAF, NTRK). Approximately 600 patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive combination therapy with dom + zim (dom 1200 mg intravenous [IV] once every 3 weeks [Q3W] + zim 360 mg IV Q3W) or pembrolizumab monotherapy (200 mg IV Q3W) for 21-day cycles until disease progression, intolerance, or a maximum of 35 cycles. Randomization will be stratified by ECOG performance status (0 vs 1), geographical region (Asia vs non-Asia), and histology (squamous vs non-squamous). The primary efficacy endpoint is overall survival. Secondary efficacy endpoints include blinded independent central review of progression-free survival and confirmed overall response rate according to RECIST v1.1. Safety endpoints include the presence of treatment-emergent adverse events and laboratory parameters. Health-related quality of life will be assessed by measuring the time to first symptom deterioration in the NSCLC-Symptom Assessment Questionnaire total score. Study recruitment is planned in Asia, North and South America, Africa, and Europe. Clinical trial information: NCT04736173 .

Efficacy and Safety Analysis of Combination Therapy Consisting of Intravenous Immunoglobulin and Corticosteroids versus Respective Monotherapies in the Treatment of Relapsed ITP in Adults.

Objective In this study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination therapy, consisting of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) and corticosteroids, in comparison to respective monotherapies in the treatment of relapsed immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) in adults. Methods A retrospective analysis of clinical data was conducted on 205 adult patients with relapsed ITP who received first-line combination therapy or monotherapy in multiple centers across China from January 2010 to December 2022. The study evaluated the patients' clinical characteristics, efficacy, and safety. Results We found that the proportion of patients with platelet counts in complete response was significantly higher in the combination group (71.83%) compared with the IVIg group (43.48%) and the corticosteroids group (23.08%). The mean PLT max in the combination group (178 × 10 9 /L) was significantly higher than that in the IVIg group (109 × 10 9 /L) and the corticosteroids group (76 × 10 9 /L). Additionally, the average time for platelet counts to reach 30 × 10 9 /L, 50 × 10 9 /L, and 100 × 10 9 /L in the combination group was significantly shorter than in the monotherapy groups. The proportion curves for reaching these platelet counts during treatment were also significantly different from those in the monotherapy groups. However, there were no significant differences in the effective rate, clinical characteristics, and adverse events among the three groups. Conclusion We concluded that combining IVIg and corticosteroids was a more effective and faster treatment for relapsed ITP in adults than using either therapy alone. The findings of this study provided clinical evidence and reference for the use of first-line combination therapy in the treatment of relapsed ITP in adults.