Implementation of guidelines for sequential therapy with fluoroquinolones in a Belgian hospital

2010 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 404-410 ◽  
Author(s):  
Franky Buyle ◽  
Dirk Vogelaers ◽  
Renaat Peleman ◽  
Georges Maele ◽  
Hugo Robays
2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jordan B Gregg

AIEC-LF82 is a strain of bacteria that is surmised to have a role in causing IBD and Crohn’s disease by activating pro-inflammatory gene expression in organisms. Using antibiotics via combination therapy has been a technique used in clinical settings in an attempt to treat the strains, however, the attempts have not been that effective nor efficient in terms of completely halting the growth and colonization of AIEC to treat IBD and Crohn's disease patients. Research has shown that regarding hindering or preventing the colonization bacterial colonies, sequential therapy tends to be more effective and time-efficient than combination therapy, with fewer adverse effects. To test if this is also the case with the AIEC-LF82 strain of bacteria, I first tested AIEC’s response to combination therapy using the Penicillin-Streptomycin, Kanamycin-Chloramphenicol, antimicrobial peptide (AMP), Kanamycin, SPE phase and LB agar plates, all of which were experimental plates other than the LB agar plate that acted as the negative control. I then tested AIEC-LF82’s response to sequential therapy using the LB+ Kan + Spe, LB + AMP + Spe, LB+ Kan/Cam + Spe, LB + P/S + Spe, LB + P/S + Kan and LB + P/S + AMP and one LB agar plate acting as the negative control. The only differences between sets a and b were the order in which antibiotics were administered in the six aforementioned treatment sets. Ultimately, I found that set b of sequential therapy, strong-weak antibiotic treatments, was the most effective treatment but that set a regarding sequential therapy was actually the least effective of all of the treatments. In conclusion, using strong-weak sequential antibiotic therapy treatments appears to be a potentially promising option to treat patients suffering from Crohn's disease and IBD.


2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 611-617 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kazuomi Ueshima ◽  
Naoshi Nishida ◽  
Masatoshi Kudo

Objectives: Previously, no therapeutic agent has been known to improve the overall survival compared with placebo in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), who have progressed after sorafenib. In this patient population, regorafenib was first demonstrated to confer a survival benefit in the RESORCE trial, and subsequently it was approved as a second-line treatment for patients with advanced HCC. An open-label expanded access program (EAP) of regorafenib was implemented for compassionate use. We investigated the efficacy and safety of regorafenib based on our experience of the RESORCE trial and the EAP. Methods: Data from 5 patients from the RESORCE trial and 6 from the EAP were analyzed retrospectively. All patients had tolerated prior sorafenib and were progressing during sorafenib treatment. Results: The median progression-free survival was 9.2 months (95% CI 2.3-16.1). One patient achieved a partial response and 7 achieved stable disease. The objective response rate was 9.1%, and the disease control rate was 72.7%. No treatment-associated mortalities were observed. Grade 3 hypophosphatemia was observed in 2 patients, grade 2 anorexia was observed in 5 patients, and grade 3 neutropenia was observed in 2 patients. Grade 2 and grade 3 thrombocytopenia were observed in 2 and 3 patients, respectively. All treatment-related adverse events were improved by reduction or interruption of regorafenib. Five patients showed decreased serum albumin levels. Conclusion: Sorafenib and regorafenib sequential therapy presents a safe and effective treatment option for patients with advanced HCC.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document