scholarly journals Matched-paired analysis of patients treated for invasive mucormycosis: standard treatment versus posaconazole new formulations (MoveOn)

2019 ◽  
Vol 74 (11) ◽  
pp. 3315-3327 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon Salmanton-García ◽  
Danila Seidel ◽  
Philipp Koehler ◽  
Sibylle C Mellinghoff ◽  
Raoul Herbrecht ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Amphotericin B ◽  
Standard Treatment ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Oral Suspension ◽  
First Line ◽  
Limited Sample ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Cautious Interpretation ◽  
Paired Analysis ◽  
Matched Paired Analysis

Abstract Background First-line antifungal treatment for invasive mucormycosis (IM) consists of liposomal amphotericin B. Salvage treatment options are limited and often based on posaconazole oral suspension. With the approval of posaconazole new formulations, patients could benefit from improved pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability. Objectives Our aim was to assess the effectiveness of posaconazole new formulations for IM treatment. Methods We performed a case-matched analysis with proven or probable IM patients from the FungiScope® Registry. First-line posaconazole new formulations (1st-POSnew) and first-line amphotericin B plus posaconazole new formulations (1st-AMB+POSnew) cases were matched with first-line amphotericin B-based (1st-AMB) treatment controls. Salvage posaconazole new formulations (SAL-POSnew) cases were matched with salvage posaconazole oral suspension (SAL-POSsusp) controls. Each case was matched with up to three controls (based on severity, haematological/oncological malignancy, surgery and/or renal dysfunction). Results Five patients receiving 1st-POSnew, 18 receiving 1st-AMB+POSnew and 22 receiving SAL-POSnew were identified. By day 42, a favourable response was reported for 80.0% (n = 4/5) of patients receiving 1st-POSnew, for 27.8% (n = 5/18) receiving 1st-AMB+POSnew and for 50.0% (n = 11/22) receiving SAL-POSnew. Day 42 all-cause mortality of patients receiving posaconazole new formulations was lower compared with controls [20.0% (n = 1/5) in 1st-POSnew versus 53.3% (n = 8/15) in 1st-AMB; 33.3% (n = 6/18) in 1st-AMB+POSnew versus 52.0% (n = 26/50) in 1st-AMB; and 0.0% (n = 0/22) in SAL-POSnew versus 4.4% (n = 2/45) in SAL-POSsusp]. Conclusions Posaconazole new formulations were effective in terms of treatment response and associated mortality of IM. While posaconazole new formulations may be an alternative for treatment of IM, the limited sample size of our study calls for a cautious interpretation of these observations.

scholarly journals 2119. Matched-Paired Analysis of Patients Treated for Invasive Mucormycosis—Standard Treatment vs. Posaconazole New Formulations (MoveOn)

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S717-S717
Author(s):  
Jon Salmanton-Garcia ◽  
Danila Seidel ◽  
Philipp Koehler ◽  
Sibylle Mellinghoff ◽  
Hilmar Wisplinghoff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Dysfunction ◽  
Treatment Response ◽  
Amphotericin B ◽  
Liposomal Amphotericin ◽  
Standard Treatment ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
First Line ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Paired Analysis ◽  
Matched Paired Analysis

Abstract Background Current first-line (first) antifungal treatment for invasive mucormycosis (IM) consists of liposomal amphotericin B (AMB). Salvage (SAL) treatment options are limited and often based on posaconazole oral suspension (POSsusp). However, with the approval of posaconazole new formulations (POSnew), patients could benefit from improved pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability. Our aim was to assess the effectiveness of POSnew as first-line and SAL treatments for IM. Methods We performed a case-matched analysis with proven or probable IM patients from the FungiScope® Registry. 1st-POSnew and 1st-AMB+POSnew cases were matched with 1st-AMB-based treatment controls, and SAL-POSnew cases were matched with SAL-POSsusp controls. Each case was matched with up to three controls based on severity, hematological/oncological malignancy, surgery and/or renal dysfunction. Results Five patients receiving first-line POSnew alone, 18 receiving first-line POSnew combined with AMB, and 22 receiving salvage POSnew were identified. By day 42, favorable response was reported for 80.0% (n = 4/5) of patients receiving first-line POSnew, for 27.8% (n = 5/18) receiving first-line POSnew plus AMB, and for 50.0% (n = 11/22) receiving salvage POSnew. Day-42 all-cause mortality of patients receiving POSnew was lower compared with mortality in their respective controls (20.0% (n = 1/5) in 1st-POSnew vs. 53.3% (n = 8/15) in 1st-AMB; 33.3% (n = 6/18) in 1st-AMB+POSnew vs. 52.0% (n = 26/50) in 1st-AMB; 0.0% (n = 0/22) in SAL-POSnew vs. 4.4% (n = 2/45) in SAL-POSsusp). Conclusion In the observed patients, POSnew was effective in terms of treatment response and-associated mortality of IM. POSnew may be an alternative for the treatment of IM. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

scholarly journals Hairy cell leukemia and COVID-19 adaptation of treatment guidelines

Leukemia ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Grever ◽  
Leslie Andritsos ◽  
Versha Banerji ◽  
Jacqueline C. Barrientos ◽  
Seema Bhat ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hairy Cell Leukemia ◽  
Standard Treatment ◽  
Preventive Measures ◽  
Treatment Guidelines ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Immunosuppressive Agents ◽  
Hairy Cell ◽  
Cell Leukemia ◽  
First Line ◽  
Clinical Strategies

AbstractStandard treatment options in classic HCL (cHCL) result in high response rates and near normal life expectancy. However, the disease itself and the recommended standard treatment are associated with profound and prolonged immunosuppression, increasing susceptibility to infections and the risk for a severe course of COVID-19. The Hairy Cell Leukemia Foundation (HCLF) has recently convened experts and discussed different clinical strategies for the management of these patients. The new recommendations adapt the 2017 consensus for the diagnosis and management with cHCL to the current COVID-19 pandemic. They underline the option of active surveillance in patients with low but stable blood counts, consider the use of targeted and non-immunosuppressive agents as first-line treatment for cHCL, and give recommendations on preventive measures against COVID-19.

scholarly journals Patient profiles as an aim to optimize selection in the second line setting: the role of aflibercept

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. González Astorga ◽  
F. Salvà Ballabrera ◽  
E. Aranda Aguilar ◽  
E. Élez Fernández ◽  
P. García-Alfonso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Therapeutic Option ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Effective Therapeutic Option ◽  
Line Setting ◽  
First Line Treatment

AbstractColorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. For metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients, it is recommended, as first-line treatment, chemotherapy (CT) based on doublet cytotoxic combinations of fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) and fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX). In addition to CT, biological (targeted agents) are indicated in the first-line treatment, unless contraindicated. In this context, most of mCRC patients are likely to progress and to change from first line to second line treatment when they develop resistance to first-line treatment options. It is in this second line setting where Aflibercept offers an alternative and effective therapeutic option, thought its specific mechanism of action for different patient’s profile: RAS mutant, RAS wild-type (wt), BRAF mutant, potentially resectable and elderly patients. In this paper, a panel of experienced oncologists specialized in the management of mCRC experts have reviewed and selected scientific evidence focused on Aflibercept as an alternative treatment.

scholarly journals Immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma: evaluation and management of adverse events associated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 175883592110311
Author(s):  
Chiun Hsu ◽  
Lorenza Rimassa ◽  
Hui-Chuan Sun ◽  
Arndt Vogel ◽  
Ahmed O. Kaseb
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Kinase Inhibitor ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Safety Data ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Antiangiogenic Agents ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
First Line

In light of positive efficacy and safety findings from the IMbrave150 trial of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, this novel combination has become the preferred first-line standard of care for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Several additional trials are ongoing that combine an immune checkpoint inhibitor with another agent such as a multiple kinase inhibitor or antiangiogenic agent. Therefore, the range of first-line treatment options for unresectable HCC is likely to increase, and healthcare providers need succinct information about the use of such combinations, including their efficacy and key aspects of their safety profiles. Here, we review efficacy and safety data on combination immunotherapies and offer guidance on monitoring and managing adverse events, especially those associated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. Because of their underlying liver disease and high likelihood of portal hypertension, patients with unresectable HCC are at particular risk of gastrointestinal bleeding, and this risk may be exacerbated by treatments that include antiangiogenic agents. Healthcare providers also need to be alert to the risks of proteinuria and hypertension, colitis, hepatitis, and reactivation of hepatitis B or C virus infection. They should also be aware of the possibility of rarer but potentially life-threatening adverse events such as pneumonitis and cardiovascular events. Awareness of the risks associated with these therapies and knowledge of adverse event monitoring and management will become increasingly important as the therapeutic range broadens in unresectable HCC.

scholarly journals 789. Evaluation of Bezlotoxumab for Prevention of Recurrent Clostridioides difficile Infection in Patients at High Risk for Recurrence

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S438-S439
Author(s):  
Tanner M Johnson ◽  
Amanda Howard ◽  
Kerry Schwarz ◽  
Lorna Allen ◽  
Misha Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Fecal Microbiota Transplantation ◽  
Therapeutic Option ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
High Risk Patient ◽  
Recurrent Infection ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Clostridioides Difficile ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Clostridioides Difficile Infection

Abstract Background Recurrent Clostridioides difficile infection (rCDI) within 180 days of the index episode is associated with a 33% increase in mortality and, to-date, few treatment options exist to prevent recurrent infection. Bezlotoxumab (BEZ) is a novel therapeutic option for the prevention of rCDI, yet limited data exist regarding its effectiveness in patients at high-risk for recurrence outside of controlled trials. This study aimed to compare BEZ to a historical standard of care (SoC) cohort for the prevention of rCDI in patients at high risk for recurrence. Methods A multi-center retrospective cohort study of patients within an academic health-system with one or more risk factors for rCDI. Patients received SoC with oral vancomycin (VAN) or fidaxomicin (FDX) from January 2015 to December 2017 or BEZ, in addition to oral SoC, from September 2017 to September 2019. The primary outcome was rCDI within 90 days of completion of oral VAN or FDX. Secondary outcomes included all-cause readmission, all-cause mortality, and safety events at 90 days. Results One-hundred twenty patients received BEZ in addition to SoC (n=47) or SoC alone (n=73). Mean (SD) age was 55 (16) years, mean (SD) number of lifetime CDI was 3 (2) episodes, and 30.8% of patients had severe CDI. Six (12.8%) patients in the BEZ cohort and thirty-one (42.5%) in the SoC cohort experienced rCDI at 90 days [OR (95% CI) = 0.20 (0.07-0.53), p=< 0.01]. Incidence of all-cause mortality (2.1% vs 5.5%, p=0.67) and all-cause readmission (42.6% vs 56.2%, p=0.20) within 90 days were not statistically different between groups. Patient body weight, timing of BEZ administration, CDI severity, nor prior receipt of fecal microbiota transplantation significantly affected BEZ effectiveness. BEZ was well tolerated with one infusion-related reaction. There were no heart failure exacerbations among BEZ recipients and two exacerbations identified from control group. Conclusion In patients with at least one risk factor for rCDI, BEZ in addition to SoC was associated with lower rates of recurrent infection than SoC alone and may be a reasonable adjunct therapy in high risk patient populations. Disclosures matthew miller, PharmD, Allergan (Speaker’s Bureau)Tetraphase (Speaker’s Bureau)

Stability of amphotericin B in an extemporaneously compounded oral suspension

2001 ◽  
Vol 58 (11) ◽  
pp. 1021-1024 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul J. Dentinger ◽  
Chad F. Swenson ◽  
Nasr H. Anaizi
Keyword(s):  
Amphotericin B ◽  
Oral Suspension

scholarly journals Pharmacological Treatment of Schizophrenia: Japanese Expert Consensus

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hitoshi Sakurai ◽  
Norio Yasui-Furukori ◽  
Takefumi Suzuki ◽  
Hiroyuki Uchida ◽  
Hajime Baba ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Relapse Prevention ◽  
Negative Symptoms ◽  
Japanese Society ◽  
Treatment Guidelines ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Standard Deviation Score ◽  
Expert Consensus ◽  
Depression And Anxiety ◽  
First Line ◽  
A Current

Abstract Introduction Conventional treatment guidelines of schizophrenia do not necessarily provide solutions on clinically important issues. Methods A total of 141 certified psychiatrists of the Japanese Society of Clinical Neuropsychopharmacology evaluated treatment options regarding 19 clinically relevant situations in the treatment of schizophrenia with a 9-point scale (1=“disagree” and 9=“agree”). Results First-line antipsychotics varied depending on predominant symptoms: risperidone (mean±standard deviation score, 7.9±1.4), olanzapine (7.5±1.6), and aripiprazole (6.9±1.9) were more likely selected for positive symptoms; aripiprazole (7.6±1.6) for negative symptoms; aripiprazole (7.3±1.9), olanzapine (7.2±1.9), and quetiapine (6.9±1.9) for depression and anxiety; and olanzapine (7.9±1.5) and risperidone (7.5±1.5) for excitement and aggression. While only aripiprazole was categorized as a first-line treatment for relapse prevention (7.6±1.0) in patients without noticeable symptoms, aripiprazole (8.0±1.6) and brexpiprazole (6.9±2.3) were categorized as such for social integration. First-line treatments in patients who are vulnerable to extrapyramidal symptoms include quetiapine (7.5±2.0) and aripiprazole (6.9±2.1). Discussion These clinical recommendations represent the expert consensus on the use of a particular antipsychotic medication for a particular situation, filling a current gap in the literature.

scholarly journals Biology and Management of Dedifferentiated Liposarcoma: State of the Art and Perspectives

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (15) ◽  
pp. 3230
Author(s):  
Jun Nishio ◽  
Shizuhide Nakayama ◽  
Kazuki Nabeshima ◽  
Takuaki Yamamoto
Keyword(s):  
Standard Treatment ◽  
Clinical Presentation ◽  
Current Knowledge ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Dedifferentiated Liposarcoma ◽  
Cyclin Dependent Kinase ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Well Differentiated ◽  
Genetic Events

Dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDL) is defined as the transition from well-differentiated liposarcoma (WDL)/atypical lipomatous tumor (ALT) to non-lipogenic sarcoma, which arises mostly in the retroperitoneum and deep soft tissue of proximal extremities. It is characterized by a supernumerary ring and giant marker chromosomes, both of which contain amplified sequences of 12q13-15 including murinedouble minute 2 (MDM2) and cyclin-dependent kinase 4 (CDK4) cell cycle oncogenes. Detection of MDM2 (and/or CDK4) amplification serves to distinguish DDL from other undifferentiated sarcomas. Recently, CTDSP1/2-DNM3OS fusion genes have been identified in a subset of DDL. However, the genetic events associated with dedifferentiation of WDL/ALT remain to be clarified. The standard treatment for localized DDL is surgery, with or without radiotherapy. In advanced disease, the standard first-line therapy is an anthracycline-based regimen, with either single-agent anthracycline or anthracycline in combination with the alkylating agent ifosfamide. Unfortunately, this regimen has not necessarily led to a satisfactory clinical outcome. Recent advances in the understanding of the pathogenesis of DDL may allow for the development of more-effective innovative therapeutic strategies. This review provides an overview of the current knowledge on the clinical presentation, pathogenesis, histopathology and treatment of DDL.

Clostridium difficile—Associated Diarrhea, an Emerging Epidemic: Therapeutic Options

2007 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 347-353
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Emerson
Keyword(s):  
Clostridium Difficile ◽  
Hospital Admissions ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Infectious Diarrhea ◽  
First Line ◽  
Oral Vancomycin ◽  
Considerable Morbidity ◽  
Clostridium Difficile Associated Diarrhea ◽  
Pharmacologic Agents ◽  
Oral Metronidazole

Clostridum difficile—associated disease (CDAD) is the leading cause of infectious diarrhea and is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. The incidence is estimated to range from 3.4 to 8.4 cases per 1000 hospital admissions, and it has become a growing problem at many institutions. Treatment options for CDAD are limited due to a paucity of new pharmacologic agents and studies examining other potential treatments. Historically oral metronidazole and oral vancomycin have been used as first-line agents in the treating CDAD, however recent reports of treatment failure and recurrence with these agents have surfaced. These reports illustrate a need for novel pharmacologic agents and a thorough review of currently available agents that may have activity against C difficile. Available data on the treatment of CDAD were extracted and reviewed to outline the appropriate management of CDAD.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document