Over-the-counter sales of drugs used as second-line therapy for tuberculosis in different parts of the world: a review

Background: Pre-treated patients with first-line treatment can be offered a second treatment with the aim of improving their poor clinical prognosis. The therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) patients who did not respond to first-line therapy has limited treatment options. Recently, many studies have paid much attention to the efficacy of bevacizumab as an adjuvant treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy compared with bevacizumab-naive based chemotherapy as second-line treatment in people with metastatic CRC. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for eligible studies updated to March 2018. Randomized-controlled trials comparing addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy without bevacizumab in MCRC patients were included, of which, the main interesting results were the efficacy and safety profiles of the addition of bevacizumab in patients with MCRC as second-line therapy. Result: Five trials were eligible in the meta-analysis. Patients who received the combined bevacizumab and chemotherapy treatment in MCRC as second-line therapy showed a longer overall survival (OS) (OR=0.80,95%CI=0.72-0.89, P<0.0001) and progression-free survival (PFS) (OR=0.69,95%CI=0.61-0.77, P<0.00001). In addition, there was no significant difference in objective response rate (ORR) (RR=1.36,95%CI=0.82-2.24, P=0.23) or severe adverse event (SAE) (RR=1.02,95%CI=0.88-1.19, P=0.78) between bevacizumab-based chemotherapy and bevacizumabnaive based chemotherapy. Conclusion: Our results suggest that the addition of bevacizumab to the chemotherapy therapy could be an efficient and safe treatment option for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer as second-line therapy and without increasing the risk of an adverse event.

Download Full-text

Relapse After Early-Stage, Favorable Hodgkin Lymphoma: Disease Characteristics and Outcomes With Conventional or High-Dose Chemotherapy

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.20.00947 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 39 (2) ◽

pp. 107-115

Author(s):

Paul J. Bröckelmann ◽

Horst Müller ◽

Teresa Guhl ◽

Karolin Behringer ◽

Michael Fuchs ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Hodgkin Lymphoma ◽

Early Stage ◽

High Dose Chemotherapy ◽

Sensitivity Analyses ◽

High Dose ◽

Second Line ◽

Second Line Therapy ◽

Line Therapy ◽

Significant Difference ◽

First Diagnosis

PURPOSE We evaluated disease and treatment characteristics of patients with relapse after risk-adapted first-line treatment of early-stage, favorable, classic Hodgkin lymphoma (ES-HL). We compared second-line therapy with high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) or conventional chemotherapy (CTx). METHODS We analyzed patients with relapse after ES-HL treated within the German Hodgkin Study Group HD10+HD13 trials. We compared, by Cox proportional hazards regression, progression-free survival (PFS) after relapse (second PFS) treated with either ASCT or CTx and performed sensitivity analyses with overall survival (OS) from relapse and Kaplan-Meier statistics. RESULTS A total of 174 patients’ disease relapsed after treatment in the HD10 (n = 53) and HD13 (n = 121) trials. Relapse mostly occurred > 12 months after first diagnosis, predominantly with stage I-II disease. Of 172 patients with known second-line therapy, 85 received CTx (49%); 70, ASCT (41%); 11, radiotherapy only (6%); and 4, palliative single agent therapies (2%). CTx was predominantly bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone (BEACOPP [68%]), followed by the combination regimen of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (19%), or other regimens (13%). Patients aged > 60 years at relapse had shorter second PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 3.0; P = .0029) and were mostly treated with CTx (n = 33 of 49; 67%) and rarely with ASCT (n = 8; 16%). After adjustment for age and a disadvantage of ASCT after the more historic HD10 trial, we did not observe a significant difference in the efficacy of CTx versus ASCT for second PFS (HR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.3 to 1.6; P = .39). In patients in the HD13 trial who were aged ≤ 60 years, the 2-year, second PFS rate was 94.0% with CTx (95% CI, 85.7% to 100%) versus 83.3% with ASCT (95% CI, 71.8% to 94.8%). Additional sensitivity analyses including OS confirmed these observations. CONCLUSION After contemporary treatment of ES-HL, relapse mostly occurred > 12 months after first diagnosis. Polychemotherapy regimens such as BEACOPP are frequently administered and may constitute a reasonable treatment option for selected patients with relapse after ES-HL.

Download Full-text