scholarly journals Long-term safety of icatibant treatment of patients with angioedema in real-world clinical practice

Allergy ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 72 (6) ◽  
pp. 994-998 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Zanichelli ◽  
M. Maurer ◽  
W. Aberer ◽  
T. Caballero ◽  
H. J. Longhurst ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Real World

scholarly journals How I manage ibrutinib intolerance and complications in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 133 (12) ◽  
pp. 1298-1307 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah M. Stephens ◽  
John C. Byrd
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Real World ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Targeted Therapeutics ◽  
Therapeutic Approaches ◽  
Therapeutic Alternatives

Abstract Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) therapy has changed dramatically with the introduction of several targeted therapeutics. Ibrutinib was the first approved for use in 2014 and now is used for initial and salvage therapy of CLL patients. With its widespread use in clinical practice, ibrutinib’s common and uncommon adverse events reported less frequently in earlier clinical trials have been experienced more frequently in real-world practice. In particular, atrial fibrillation, bleeding, infections, and arthralgias have been reported. The management of ibrutinib’s adverse events often cannot be generalized but must be individualized to the patient and their long-term risk of additional complications. When ibrutinib was initially developed, there were limited therapeutic alternatives for CLL, which often resulted in treating through the adverse events. At the present time, there are several effective alternative agents available, so transition to an alternative CLL directed therapy may be considered. Given the continued expansion of ibrutinib across many therapeutic areas, investigation of the pathogenesis of adverse events with this agent and also clinical trials examining therapeutic approaches for complications arising during therapy are needed. Herein, we provide strategies we use in real-world CLL clinical practice to address common adverse events associated with ibrutinib.

Patterns of hedgehog inhibitor (HHI) treatment interruptions and re-initiations among patients with basal cell carcinoma (BCC) in real-world clinical practice.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19349-e19349
Author(s):  
Jessica J. Jalbert ◽  
Chieh-I Chen ◽  
Ning Wu ◽  
Matthew G. Fury ◽  
Emily S Ruiz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Real World ◽  
Treatment Duration ◽  
Index Date ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Kaplan Meier ◽  
Treatment Interruptions ◽  
Observational Cohort ◽  
Practice Methods

e19349 Background: HHIs are oral targeted therapies approved for the treatment of advanced BCC but treatment-related adverse events may result in treatment interruptions or discontinuation. The objective of this study was to describe HHI treatment patterns among patients with BCC in real-world clinical practice. Methods: We conducted an observational cohort study using MarketScan Commercial/Medicare databases (01/01/2013–09/30/2018). We identified new users of HHIs (index date = date of the first dispensation), ≥18 years of age who were continuously enrolled for ≥6 months prior to the index date (i.e. baseline) with ≥1 baseline BCC diagnosis. Treatment interruptions (TI) were defined as a lack of dispensation following the exhaustion of days’ supply and allotted grace period (GP). Re-initiation (RI) was defined as ≥1 HHI dispensation after TI. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to estimate risk and time to TI and, among patients with a TI, incidence of RI. HHIs are generally dispensed in 30-days’ supply and indicated as long as a patient derives a clinical benefit; however, since TIs are commonly employed during HHI therapy, sensitivity analyses were conducted using GPs of 14, 30, 60, 90, and 120 days. Results: We identified 469 patients with a BCC diagnosis initiating HHIs. The mean (SD) age was 67.6 (15.8) years, 64.2% were men, 51.2% were covered by commercial insurance, and 99.2% initiated vismodegib. Using a GP of 14, 30, 60, 90, and 120 days, the risk of TI was 79.2%, 68.8%, 60.0%, 55.4%, and 51.4% at 6 months and 94.8%, 91.3%, 88.2%, 83.2%, and 80.2% at 1 year, respectively. Median HHI treatment duration ranged from 94 days (95% CI: 90–109) using a GP of 14 days to 173 days (95% CI: 156–194) using a GP of 120 days. At 6 months following TI, incidence of RI was 35.8%, 19.8%, 11.3%, 6.9%, and 4.9% using a GP of 14, 30, 60, 90, and 120 days, respectively. The incidence of HHI RI at 1-year following TI ranged from 40.8% using a 14-day GP to 13.4% using a 120-day GP. Conclusions: Median HHI treatment duration was approximately 6 months, even after allowing for a 120-day GP. Median treatment duration was considerably shorter than what has been reported in clinical trials. Our results suggest that long-term HHI therapy may be difficult in a real-world setting.

Long-term safety and efficacy are observed after implantation of Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent in real-world clinical practice

2008 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 338-344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chi-Hang Lee ◽  
Adrian Low ◽  
Eric Hong ◽  
Bee-Choo Tai ◽  
Ing-Haan Lim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Real World ◽  
Safety And Efficacy

scholarly journals 35 Long-term Improvements in Site-Rated Outcomes with Deutetrabenazine Treatment in Patients with Tardive Dyskinesia

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 193-194
Author(s):  
Karen E. Anderson ◽  
David Stamler ◽  
Mat D. Davis ◽  
Nicholas Gross ◽  
Robert A. Hauser ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Tardive Dyskinesia ◽  
Real World ◽  
Treatment Success ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Abnormal Movements ◽  
Global Impression Of Change

AbstractBackgroundTardive dyskinesia (TD) is an often-irreversible movement disorder that may intensify the stigma of patients with psychiatric disorders and worsen quality of life. In two randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled, 12-week trials, ARM-TD and AIM-TD (‘parent studies’), deutetrabenazine (DTB) demonstrated statistically significant improvements in centrally read Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) scores at Week 12 compared with PBO and was generally well tolerated.Study ObjectiveTo evaluate the long-term efficacy of DTB in an open-label safety study following double-blind treatment using site-rated efficacy measures: AIMS, the Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC) and the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC), which may be used in real-world clinical practice settings.MethodPatients with TD who completed the parent studies were eligible to enter this open-label, long-term extension (OLE) after completing the 1-week washout period and final evaluation in the blinded portion of the trial. This extension comprised a 6-week titration period followed by a long-term maintenance phase. Patients began DTB at 12mg/day, titrating up to a maximum total dose of 48mg/day based on dyskinesia control and tolerability. Efficacy endpoints included in this analysis are the change in site-rated AIMS score (items 1–7) from parent study baseline, and the proportion of patients who were “Much Improved” or “Very Much Improved” (treatment success) on the CGIC and PGIC from OLE baseline.ResultsAt the end of the parent studies (Week 12), patients treated with DTB had experienced greater mean (standard error) improvements in site-rated AIMS score (–5.0[0.40]) than patients given PBO (–3.2[0.47]). With long-term DTB treatment, both groups experienced improvements in site-rated AIMS scores (prior DTB, –7.9[0.62]; prior placebo, –6.6[0.64]) compared with parent study baseline. Similarly, at the end of the parent studies, a greater proportion of patients treated with DTB had treatment success on the CGIC (DTB, 51%; PBO, 32%) and the PGIC (DTB, 46%; PBO: 33%); whereas at Week 54 of the OLE study, treatment success on CGIC and PGIC were similar in both the CGIC (prior DTB: 66%; prior PBO: 68%) and PGIC (prior DTB: 62%; prior PBO: 62%) groups. DTB was generally well tolerated.ConclusionsPatients treated with DTB showed improvements in abnormal movements, as measured by site-rated AIMS, CGIC, and PGIC scores, which may be used in real-world clinical practice settings. These results corroborate the previously reported efficacy of DTB as observed in the 12-week, double-blind ARM-TD and AIM-TD trials, in which central raters were used to evaluate AIMS scores.Presented at: American Psychiatric Association Annual Meeting; May 5–9, 2018, New York, New York, USAFunding Acknowledgements: Funding: This study was supported by Teva Pharmaceuticals, Petach Tikva, Israel.

Long-term safety and efficacy of sirolimus-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in real world clinical practice in Japan

2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 234-245 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takeshi Kimura ◽  
Takeshi Morimoto ◽  
Yutaka Furukawa ◽  
Yoshihisa Nakagawa ◽  
Kazushige Kadota ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Real World ◽  
Bare Metal Stents ◽  
Metal Stents ◽  
Bare Metal ◽  
Safety And Efficacy

OP410 Real-World Benefit Of Endovascular Repair Of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms - Comparison Of GORE® Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment And National Institute for Clinical Excellence 2018 Guidance

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (S1) ◽  
pp. 8-8
Author(s):  
Frank O'Neill ◽  
Bismark Baidoo ◽  
Matthew Waltham
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Resource Use ◽  
Real World ◽  
Clinical Excellence ◽  
Draft Guidance ◽  
Current Clinical Practice ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
Abdominal Aortic ◽  
Global Registry

IntroductionEndovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is routinely used for treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). In 2018, draft guidance from the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) suggested EVAR was not cost-effective compared to open surgical repair. The analysis was driven by clinical inputs from randomized control trials which may not reflect current clinical practice. Data from registries may inform more robust economic modelling. The Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment (GREAT) was initiated to collect contemporary real-world data on the performance of GORE® aortic endografts and includes long-term data on survival, re-interventions and resource use. This study compares the real-world values for mortality and resource use following elective EVAR as collected by GREAT with the 2018 NICE AAA draft guidance.MethodsA total of 1,348 patients (88.7% men; mean age 73.1 years) undergoing elective AAA repair with the GORE® EXCLUDER device. Mortality, re-intervention and resource use was compared with the economic inputs for 2018 NICE draft guidance cost-utility analysis.ResultsAll patients survived EVAR compared to the 0.4 percent mortality indicated in the NICE analysis. All-cause mortality was lower through 1, 3 and 5 years with values of 6.9, 14.8 and 16.2 percent respectively compared to the NICE base case. The average length of stay was 3.7 days in GREAT compared to 8.34 days in the NICE analysis. Short- and long-term re-interventions were also lower with real-world data (3.6% versus 7.3% and 5.5% versus 8.3%).ConclusionsGREAT provides conflicting data on survival and resource use associated with EVAR compared to inputs of the 2018 NICE draft guidance These differences are likely to significantly alter incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Robust cost-effectiveness modelling in health technology assessments should consider contemporary data, as it is likely more reflective of current clinical practice and more informative for clinical and economic decision making for AAA.

scholarly journals Effectiveness and Safety Outcomes in Patients with Hemophilia a Receiving Antihemophilic Factor (Recombinant) for at Least 5 Years in a Real-World Setting: 6-Year Interim Analysis of the Ahead International and German Studies

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
Dimitrios A. Tsakiris ◽  
Johannes Oldenburg ◽  
Robert Klamroth ◽  
Benoît Guillet ◽  
Kate Khair ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Real World ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Hemophilia A ◽  
Routine Clinical Practice ◽  
Publicly Traded ◽  
Real World Setting ◽  
Antihemophilic Factor

Introduction: Long-term effectiveness and safety data in patients treated in routine clinical practice settings can be captured from real-world studies. The international (INT) and German (GER) Antihemophilic factor (recombinant; rAHF) Hemophilia A (HA) outcome Database (AHEAD) studies assess long-term effectiveness and safety outcomes in patients with moderate HA (factor VIII level 1-5%) or severe HA (factor VIII <1%) receiving rAHF (ADVATE®; Baxalta US Inc., a Takeda company, Lexington, MA, USA) in routine clinical practice. Methods: These are non-interventional, prospective, long-term, multicenter studies (INT: NCT02078427; GER: DRKS 00000556). Key outcomes include Gilbert scores (primary endpoint; pain scored 0-3; bleeding scored 0-3, and physical exam scored 0-12), annualized bleeding rates (ABRs) by disease severity, and adverse events (AEs). Findings reported here are from the 6-year interim analysis (data cut-off: July 15, 2019), and focus on patients who have received rAHF prophylaxis or on-demand (OD) treatment for ≥5 years in the studies. All data are reported for the safety analysis set (SAS), which comprised patients who passed screening and were assigned to a treatment group or regimen in the INT study, or were enrolled and have received ≥1 dose of rAHF since study enrollment in the GER study. Results: At the time of analysis, the INT study SAS comprised 707 patients, 156 of whom had received ≥5 years of rAHF treatment during the study. The GER study SAS comprised 382 patients, 231 of whom had received ≥5 years of rAHF treatment. Average Gilbert scores (all joints) were consistently low (years 1-6: median 0-1.0; mean 0-1.3) for both children aged 2 to <12 years and adolescents aged 12 to <18 years receiving rAHF prophylaxis within both studies. In the INT study, average Gilbert scores were lower with prophylaxis than with OD therapy in adults (aged ≥18 years) throughout the observation period (years 1-6: median: 0.9-1.4 [n=8-25] vs 1.4-6.3 [n=2-8], respectively; mean: 1.4-2.2 vs 2.1-6.3; respectively); significant differences (P<0.05) between mean values were observed for years 3, 4, and 6. In the GER study, average Gilbert scores were slightly higher with prophylaxis than with OD in adults (years 1-6: median: 0.7-2.2 [n=12-37] vs 0.3-1.4 [n=2-15], respectively; mean: 1.0-2.7 vs 0.5-2.2, respectively; P-values not available). In the INT study, ABRs were consistently lower in patients receiving rAHF prophylaxis than in those receiving rAHF OD, irrespective of disease severity (Table). A similar trend was observed in the GER study in patients with severe HA, whereas ABRs were similar for both treatment regimens in patients with moderate HA. In both studies, greater proportions of patients with moderate or severe HA receiving rAHF prophylaxis had 0 bleeds than those receiving rAHF OD (Table). In the INT study, 842 AEs were reported in 116/156 (74.4%) patients, including 2 treatment-related serious AEs in 2 (1.3%) patients. In the GER study, 1321 AEs were reported in 197/231 (85.3%) patients, including 29 treatment-related serious AEs in 14 (6.1%) patients. Conclusions: These findings in patients receiving rAHF for ≥5 years in a real-world setting corroborate previous data on the long-term efficacy and tolerability of rAHF in patients with moderate or severe HA. rAHF demonstrated effectiveness in maintaining joint health (as measured by Gilbert scores) in adult patients. Table Disclosures Tsakiris: Roche: Research Funding; Shire, a Takeda company: Research Funding; Sobi: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; CSL Behring: Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Octapharma: Research Funding. Oldenburg:Sobi: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Biotest: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; CSL Behring: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Octapharma: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Shire, a Takeda company: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Biogen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Chugai: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Grifols: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Klamroth:Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Biotest: Speakers Bureau; Grifols: Speakers Bureau; Takeda/Shire: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Octapharma: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Biomarin: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; CSL Behring: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sobi: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Guillet:CSL Behring: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Octapharma: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Shire, a Takeda company: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Roche-Chugai: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Khair:Shire, a Takeda company: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sobi: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Baxalta/Shire, Takeda companies: Research Funding. Huth-Kühne:Bayer: Consultancy; CSL Behring: Consultancy; Shire, a Takeda company: Consultancy; Sobi: Consultancy. Kurnik:Sobi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Biotest: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; CSL Behring: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Shire, a Takeda company: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Regensburger:Takeda Pharma Vertrieb GmbH & Co. KG: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Botha:Takeda Pharmaceutical International AG: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Fernandez:Takeda Pharmaceutical International AG: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Tang:Takeda Pharmaceutical International AG: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Ozelo:Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Shire/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bioverativ/Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; BioMarin: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document