-
1.
Efficacy of vonoprazan against bleeding from endoscopic submucosal dissection-induced gastric ulcers under antithrombotic medication: A cross-design synthesis of randomized and observational studies.
Hidaka, Y, Imai, T, Inaba, T, Kagawa, T, Omae, K, Tanaka, S
PloS one. 2021;(12):e0261703
Abstract
Vonoprazan, a potassium-competitive acid blocker, is expected to be superior to proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in preventing post-endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD)-induced gastric bleeding. However, the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies on the efficacy of vonoprazan have been inconsistent. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of vonoprazan in antithrombotic drug users, a population that has been excluded from RCTs. Treatment effects were assessed using cross-design synthesis, which can be adjusted for differences in study design and patient characteristics. We used data from an RCT in Japan (70 patients in the vonoprazan group and 69 in the PPI group) and an observational study (408 patients in the vonoprazan group and 870 in the PPI group). After matching, among the antithrombotic drug users in the observational study, post-ESD bleeding was noted in 8 out of 86 patients in the vonoprazan group and 18 out of 86 patients in the PPI group. After pooling the data from the RCT and observational study, the risk difference for antithrombotic drug users was -14.6% (95% CI: -22.0 to -7.2). CDS analysis suggested that vonoprazan is more effective than PPIs in preventing post-ESD bleeding among patients administered antithrombotic medications.
-
2.
Sunitinib added to FOLFIRI versus FOLFIRI in patients with chemorefractory advanced adenocarcinoma of the stomach or lower esophagus: a randomized, placebo-controlled phase II AIO trial with serum biomarker program.
Moehler, M, Gepfner-Tuma, I, Maderer, A, Thuss-Patience, PC, Ruessel, J, Hegewisch-Becker, S, Wilke, H, Al-Batran, SE, Rafiyan, MR, Weißinger, F, et al
BMC cancer. 2016;(1):699
Abstract
BACKGROUND As a multi-targeted anti-angiogenic receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK) inhibitor sunitinib (SUN) has been established for renal cancer and gastrointestinal stromal tumors. In advanced refractory esophagogastric cancer patients, monotherapy with SUN was associated with good tolerability but limited tumor response. METHODS This double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, phase II clinical trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of SUN as an adjunct to second and third-line FOLFIRI (NCT01020630). Patients were randomized to receive 6-week cycles including FOLFIRI plus sodium folinate (Na-FOLFIRI) once every two weeks and SUN or placebo (PL) continuously for four weeks followed by a 2-week rest period. The primary study endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Preplanned serum analyses of VEGF-A, VEGF-D, VEGFR2 and SDF-1α were performed retrospectively. RESULTS Overall, 91 patients were randomized, 45 in each group (one patient withdrew). The main grade ≥3 AEs were neutropenia and leucopenia, observed in 56 %/20 % and 27 %/16 % for FOLFIRI + SUN/FOLFIRI + PL, respectively. Median PFS was similar, 3.5 vs. 3.3 months (hazard ratio (HR) 1.11, 95 % CI 0.70-1.74, P = 0.66) for FOLFIRI + SUN vs. FOLFIRI + PL, respectively. For FOLFIRI + SUN, a trend towards longer median overall survival (OS) compared with placebo was observed (10.4 vs. 8.9 months, HR 0.82, 95 % CI 0.50-1.34, one-sided P = 0.21). In subgroup serum analyses, significant changes in VEGF-A (P = 0.017), VEGFR2 (P = 0.012) and VEGF-D (P < 0.001) serum levels were observed. CONCLUSIONS Although sunitinib combined with FOLFIRI did not improve PFS and response in chemotherapy-resistant gastric cancer, a trend towards better OS was observed. Further biomarker-driven studies with other anti-angiogenic RTK inhibitors are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION This study was registered prospectively in the NCT Clinical Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) under NCT01020630 on November 23, 2009 after approval by the leading ethics committee of the Medical Association of Rhineland-Palatinate, Mainz, in coordination with the participating ethics committees (see Additional file 2) on September 16, 2009.
-
3.
Randomised clinical trial: vonoprazan, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, vs. lansoprazole for the healing of erosive oesophagitis.
Ashida, K, Sakurai, Y, Hori, T, Kudou, K, Nishimura, A, Hiramatsu, N, Umegaki, E, Iwakiri, K
Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics. 2016;(2):240-51
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Vonoprazan is a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker which may provide clinical benefit in acid-related disorders. AIM: To verify the non-inferiority of vonoprazan vs. lansoprazole in patients with erosive oesophagitis (EE), and to establish its long-term safety and efficacy as maintenance therapy. METHODS In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group comparison study, patients with endoscopically confirmed EE (LA Classification Grades A-D) were randomly allocated to receive vonoprazan 20 mg or lansoprazole 30 mg once daily after breakfast. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with healed EE confirmed by endoscopy up to week 8. In addition, subjects who achieved healed EE in the comparison study were re-randomised into a long-term study to investigate the safety and efficacy of vonoprazan 10 or 20 mg as maintenance therapy for 52 weeks. RESULTS Of the 409 eligible subjects randomised, 401 completed the comparison study, and 305 entered the long-term maintenance study. The proportion of patients with healed EE up to week 8 was 99.0% for vonoprazan (203/205) and 95.5% for lansoprazole (190/199), thus verifying the non-inferiority of vonoprazan (P < 0.0001). Vonoprazan was also effective in patients with more severe EE (LA Classification Grades C/D) and CYP2C19 extensive metabolisers. In the long-term maintenance study, there were few recurrences (<10%) of EE in patients treated with vonoprazan 10 or 20 mg. Overall, vonoprazan was well-tolerated. CONCLUSIONS The non-inferiority of vonoprazan to lansoprazole in EE was verified in the comparison study, and vonoprazan was well-tolerated and effective during the long-term maintenance study.
-
4.
SWITCH: A Randomised, Sequential, Open-label Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Sorafenib-sunitinib Versus Sunitinib-sorafenib in the Treatment of Metastatic Renal Cell Cancer.
Eichelberg, C, Vervenne, WL, De Santis, M, Fischer von Weikersthal, L, Goebell, PJ, Lerchenmüller, C, Zimmermann, U, Bos, MM, Freier, W, Schirrmacher-Memmel, S, et al
European urology. 2015;(5):837-47
Abstract
BACKGROUND Understanding how to sequence targeted therapies for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is important for maximisation of clinical benefit. OBJECTIVES To prospectively evaluate sequential use of the multikinase inhibitors sorafenib followed by sunitinib (So-Su) versus sunitinib followed by sorafenib (Su-So) in patients with mRCC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 SWITCH study assessed So-Su versus Su-So in patients with mRCC without prior systemic therapy, and stratified by Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk score (favourable or intermediate). INTERVENTION Patients were randomised to sorafenib 400mg twice daily followed, on progression or intolerable toxicity, by sunitinib 50mg once daily (4 wk on, 2 wk off) (So-Su), or vice versa (Su-So). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS The primary endpoint was improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) with So-Su versus Su-So, assessed from randomisation to progression or death during second-line therapy. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS In total, 365 patients were randomised (So-Su, n=182; Su-So, n=183). There was no significant difference in total PFS between So-Su and Su-So (median 12.5 vs 14.9 mo; hazard ratio [HR] 1.01; 90% confidence interval [CI] 0.81-1.27; p=0.5 for superiority). OS was similar for So-Su and Su-So (median 31.5 and 30.2 mo; HR 1.00, 90% CI 0.77-1.30; p=0.5 for superiority). More So-Su patients than Su-So patients reached protocol-defined second-line therapy (57% vs 42%). Overall, adverse event rates were generally similar between the treatment arms. The most frequent any-grade treatment-emergent first-line adverse events were diarrhoea (54%) and hand-foot skin reaction (39%) for sorafenib; and diarrhoea (40%) and fatigue (40%) for sunitinib. CONCLUSIONS Total PFS was not superior with So-Su versus Su-So. These results demonstrate that sorafenib followed by sunitinib and vice versa provide similar clinical benefit in mRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY We investigated if total progression-free survival (PFS) is improved in patients with advanced/metastatic kidney cancer who are treated with sorafenib and then with sunitinib (So-Su), compared with sunitinib and then sorafenib (Su-So). We found that total PFS was not improved with So-Su compared with Su-So, but both treatment options were similarly effective in patients with advanced/metastatic kidney cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00732914, www.clinicaltrials.gov.
-
5.
Observational study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of saroglitazar in Indian diabetic dyslipidemia patients.
Shetty, SR, Kumar, S, Mathur, RP, Sharma, KH, Jaiswal, AD
Indian heart journal. 2015;(1):23-6
Abstract
UNLABELLED Saroglitazar is a dual PPAR α/γ agonist approved in India for the management of diabetic dyslipidemia. AIMS The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of saroglitazar 4 mg once daily in clinical practice. METHODS This was an observational, multicenter, single-arm study. Patients with type 2 diabetes (with on-going antidiabetic medication), age above 18 years, and triglycerides ≥200 mg/dL were included. RESULTS A total 2804 patients with a mean duration of diabetes 6.29 yrs were included in this analysis. The baseline demographic profile was: mean age of 53 yrs, mean body weight 72.3 kg and mean BMI of 27 kg/m(2). 62.5% patients were male and 57.8% were reported to be on statin therapy at baseline. All 2804 patients were on antidiabetic medications with 15.4% patients on monotherapy and rest were on two or more than two antidiabetic medications at baseline. The baseline triglycerides and HbA1C values were 312.3 mg/dL and 8.3% respectively. At 3 months follow-up, use of saroglitazar 4 mg led to significant reduction in TG (35.8%), LDL-C (16.4%), total cholesterol (19%) and non-HDL-C (23.4%). Addition of saroglitazar to baseline antidiabetic medications showed a significant 0.9% absolute reduction in HbA1c with significant improvement in fasting and post prandial plasma glucose. No serious adverse events, alteration in liver or renal enzymes and edema or weight gain were reported. CONCLUSION Saroglitazar is a potential therapeutic option in type 2 diabetic patients with high TG levels, not controlled by statins, for comprehensive control of lipid and glycemic parameters with acceptable safety profile.
-
6.
Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib as monotherapy in Japanese patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: a 12-week, randomized, phase 2 study.
Tanaka, Y, Takeuchi, T, Yamanaka, H, Nakamura, H, Toyoizumi, S, Zwillich, S
Modern rheumatology. 2015;(4):514-21
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate oral tofacitinib versus placebo for treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis in Japanese patients with inadequate response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. METHODS In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, parallel-group, 12-week, phase 2 study (clinicaltrials.gov NCT00687193), 317 patients received tofacitinib: 1, 3, 5, 10, or 15 mg as monotherapy or placebo twice daily (BID). PRIMARY ENDPOINT response rate by American College of Rheumatology (ACR) ≥ 20% improvement criteria (ACR20) at week 12. RESULTS ACR20 response rates: 37.7% (20/53), 67.9% (36/53), 73.1% (38/52), 84.9% (45/53), and 90.7% (49/54) with tofacitinib: 1, 3, 5, 10, and 15 mg BID, respectively, versus 15.4% (8/52) with placebo (p < 0.01; all doses). Dose-dependent ACR20 responses with tofacitinib versus placebo occurred from week 2 onward (p < 0.05). Changes from baseline in 28-joint disease activity score using erythrocyte sedimentation rate improved with tofacitinib versus placebo from week 4 (p < 0.01; all doses). Six tofacitinib patients experienced treatment-related serious adverse events (AEs). Most common treatment-emergent AEs: nasopharyngitis (10% vs 12%) and hyperlipidemia (5% vs 0%). Serum creatinine, hemoglobin, and total-, low-, and high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol levels increased with tofacitinib. CONCLUSIONS Tofacitinib produced dose-dependent ACR20 responses and reduced disease activity. The safety profile was consistent with that reported from global monotherapy trials.
-
7.
Intestinal cholesterol absorption, treatment with atorvastatin, and cardiovascular risk in hemodialysis patients.
Silbernagel, G, Fauler, G, Genser, B, Drechsler, C, Krane, V, Scharnagl, H, Grammer, TB, Baumgartner, I, Ritz, E, Wanner, C, et al
Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2015;(21):2291-8
Abstract
BACKGROUND Hemodialysis patients are high absorbers of intestinal cholesterol; they benefit less than other patient groups from statin therapy, which inhibits cholesterol synthesis. OBJECTIVES This study sought to investigate whether the individual cholesterol absorption rate affects atorvastatin's effectiveness to reduce cardiovascular risk in hemodialysis patients. METHODS This post-hoc analysis included 1,030 participants in the German Diabetes and Dialysis Study (4D) who were randomized to either 20 mg of atorvastatin (n=519) or placebo (n=511). The primary endpoint was a composite of major cardiovascular events. Secondary endpoints included all-cause mortality and all cardiac events. Tertiles of the cholestanol-to-cholesterol ratio, which is an established biomarker of cholesterol absorption, were used to identify high and low cholesterol absorbers. RESULTS A total of 454 primary endpoints occurred. On multivariate time-to-event analyses, the interaction term between tertiles and treatment with atorvastatin was significantly associated with the risk of reaching the primary endpoint. Stratified analysis by cholestanol-to-cholesterol ratio tertiles confirmed this effect modification: atorvastatin reduced the risk of reaching the primary endpoint in the first tertile (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.72; p=0.049), but not the second (HR: 0.79; p=0.225) or third tertiles (HR: 1.21; p=0.287). Atorvastatin consistently significantly reduced all-cause mortality and the risk of all cardiac events in only the first tertile. CONCLUSIONS Intestinal cholesterol absorption, as reflected by cholestanol-to-cholesterol ratios, predicts the effectiveness of atorvastatin to reduce cardiovascular risk in hemodialysis patients. Those with low cholesterol absorption appear to benefit from treatment with atorvastatin, whereas those with high absorption do not benefit.
-
8.
Efficacy and safety of alirocumab as add-on therapy in high-cardiovascular-risk patients with hypercholesterolemia not adequately controlled with atorvastatin (20 or 40 mg) or rosuvastatin (10 or 20 mg): design and rationale of the ODYSSEY OPTIONS Studies.
Robinson, JG, Colhoun, HM, Bays, HE, Jones, PH, Du, Y, Hanotin, C, Donahue, S
Clinical cardiology. 2014;(10):597-604
Abstract
The phase 3 ODYSSEY OPTIONS studies (OPTIONS I, NCT01730040; OPTIONS II, NCT01730053) are multicenter, multinational, randomized, double-blind, active-comparator, 24-week studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of alirocumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody targeting proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9, as add-on therapy in ∼ 650 high-cardiovascular (CV)-risk patients whose low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels are ≥100 mg/dL or ≥70 mg/dL according to the CV-risk category, high and very high CV risk, respectively, with atorvastatin (20-40 mg/d) or rosuvastatin (10-20 mg/d). Patients are randomized to receive alirocumab 75 mg via a single, subcutaneous, 1-mL injection by prefilled pen every 2 weeks (Q2W) as add-on therapy to atorvastatin (20-40 mg) or rosuvastatin (10-20 mg); or to receive ezetimibe 10 mg/d as add-on therapy to statin; or to receive statin up-titration; or to switch from atorvastatin to rosuvastatin (OPTIONS I only). At week 12, based on week 8 LDL-C levels, the alirocumab dose may be increased from 75 mg to 150 mg Q2W if LDL-C levels remain ≥100 mg/dL or ≥70 mg/dL in patients with high or very high CV risk, respectively. The primary efficacy endpoint in both studies is difference in percent change in calculated LDL-C from baseline to week 24 in the alirocumab vs control arms. The studies may provide guidance to inform clinical decision-making when patients with CV risk require additional lipid-lowering therapy to further reduce LDL-C levels. The flexibility of the alirocumab dosing regimen allows for individualized therapy based on the degree of LDL-C reduction required to achieve the desired LDL-C level.
-
9.
Differences between rosuvastatin and atorvastatin in lipid-lowering action and effect on glucose metabolism in Japanese hypercholesterolemic patients with concurrent diabetes. Lipid-lowering with highly potent statins in hyperlipidemia with type 2 diabetes patients (LISTEN) study –.
Ogawa, H, Matsui, K, Saito, Y, Sugiyama, S, Jinnouchi, H, Sugawara, M, Masuda, I, Mori, H, Waki, M, Yoshiyama, M, et al
Circulation journal : official journal of the Japanese Circulation Society. 2014;(10):2512-5
Abstract
BACKGROUND Little is known about the differences between standard-dose statins effects on glucose level and lipids in Japanese patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). METHODS AND RESULTS The 1,049 patients were randomly assigned to either the rosuvastatin group or atorvastatin group. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in the effect on non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) and HbA1c at 12 months. However, physicians tended to switch to more intensive therapy for DM in the atorvastatin group. CONCLUSIONS Rosuvastatin 5 mg and atorvastatin 10 mg have a similar lowering effect on non-HDL-C, but might be different in terms of adverse effect on glucose levels.
-
10.
Secondary analysis of APPLE study suggests atorvastatin may reduce atherosclerosis progression in pubertal lupus patients with higher C reactive protein.
Ardoin, SP, Schanberg, LE, Sandborg, CI, Barnhart, HX, Evans, GW, Yow, E, Mieszkalski, KL, Ilowite, NT, Eberhard, A, Imundo, LF, et al
Annals of the rheumatic diseases. 2014;(3):557-66
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Participants in the Atherosclerosis Prevention in Paediatric Lupus Erythematosus (APPLE) trial were randomised to placebo or atorvastatin for 36 months. The primary endpoint, reduced carotid intima medial thickness (CIMT) progression, was not met but atorvastatin-treated participants showed a trend of slower CIMT progression. Post-hoc analyses were performed to assess subgroup benefit from atorvastatin therapy. METHODS Subgroups were prespecified and defined by age (> or ≤15.5 years), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) duration (> or ≤24 months), pubertal status (Tanner score≥4 as post-pubertal or <4 as pre-pubertal), low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) (≥ or <110 mg/dl) and high-sensitivity C reactive protein (hsCRP) (≥ or <1.5 mg/l). A combined subgroup (post-pubertal and hsCRP≥1.5 mg/l) was compared to all others. Longitudinal linear mixed-effects models were developed using 12 CIMT and other secondary APPLE outcomes (lipids, hsCRP, disease activity and damage, and quality of life). Three way interaction effects were assessed for models. RESULTS Significant interaction effects with trends of less CIMT progression in atorvastatin-treated participants were observed in pubertal (3 CIMT segments), high hsCRP (2 CIMT segments), and the combined high hsCRP and pubertal group (5 CIMT segments). No significant treatment effect trends were observed across subgroups defined by age, SLE duration, LDL for CIMT or other outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS Pubertal status and higher hsCRP were linked to lower CIMT progression in atorvastatin-treated subjects, with most consistent decreases in CIMT progression in the combined pubertal and high hsCRP group. While secondary analyses must be interpreted cautiously, results suggest further research is needed to determine whether pubertal lupus patients with high CRP benefit from statin therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT00065806.