Effectiveness and Tolerability of Escitalopram in the Treatment of Depression with or Without Mental and/or Somatic Comorbidities

2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (S1) ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
A. Yfantis ◽  
D. Giailoglou ◽  
E. Chourdaki ◽  
K. Sotiriadou ◽  
N. Laggis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Severity Of Illness ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Somatic Comorbidity ◽  
Naturalistic Setting ◽  
Somatic Comorbidities ◽  
Physical Disorders ◽  
Efficacy Assessment ◽  
Intent To Treat

Purpose:To evaluate the effectiveness and tolerability of escitalopram in patients suffering from depression with or without comorbid mental and/or physical disorders in a naturalistic setting.Methods:Open-label 3-month study, conducted in 186 investigational sites in Greece. Efficacy assessment was based on CGI-S, MADRS and CGI-I scales. Tolerability was evaluated by spontaneously reported adverse events and treatment discontinuation rates. Statistical analysis was based on a modified intent-to-treat dataset (at least one valid post-baseline CGI-S measurement) and the per protocol dataset (valid CGI-S measurements at all 3 visits).Results:The analysis dataset of the study included 3,931 patients (mean age 45.5±10.8, 65.8% women, 37.4% with any comorbidity, and baseline mean MADRS 26.7±8.4). Patients with comorbid mental disorders were more severely ill at baseline (p< 0.001, both MADRS and CGI-S). Patients showed significant improvement (p< 0.001) during the treatment period based on both MADRS and CGI-S scores. There was no significant difference between the four groups (no comorbidity, comorbid mental disorder, comorbid physical disorders, comorbid mental and physical disorders). However, for both scales, the change from baseline increased with the severity of illness. Patients in the comorbidity groups had slightly higher overall discontinuation rates (8.2% to 10%) than patients without comorbidity (6.9%), with a total of 7.8% (n=308) Discontinuation due to adverse events was 2.3% (n=92).Conclusion:Escitalopram was comparably effective and well tolerated in depressed patients with and without mental and/or somatic comorbidity.

scholarly journals MLTI-14. A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF TREATMENT PARADIGMS FOR PATIENTS WITH BREAST CANCER AND ONE OR MORE BRAIN METASTASES

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. i17-i17
Author(s):  
Yosef Ellenbogen ◽  
Karanbir Brar ◽  
Nebras Warsi ◽  
Jetan Badhiwala ◽  
Alireza Mansouri
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Brain Metastases ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Molecular Features ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract BACKGROUND: Upwards of 50% of patients with advanced breast cancer are diagnosed with brain metastases (BM). Treatment options for these patients have been rapidly evolving due to increased understanding of the tumor pathophysiology and its genetic underpinnings. This systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aims to clarify the evidence guiding the treatment of brain metastases from breast cancer. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials, ClincialTrials.gov, and Web of Science were searched from inception to October 2018 for RCTs comparing treatments for breast cancer BM. We screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias independently and in duplicate. Outcomes assessed were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events (Grade 3+). RESULTS: Among 3188 abstracts, only 3 RCTs (N=412; mean sample size per group N=54.7) meeting inclusion criteria were identified. The studies were phase II or III open-label parallel superiority trials. Inclusion criteria among these trials consisted of age &gt;18 with radiologic evidence of &gt;1 BM. Exclusion criteria consisted of poor-performance functional status (ECOG &gt;2 or KPS &lt; 70). The treatment groups included whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) vs WBRT + Temozolomide, WBRT vs WBRT + Efaproxiral, and Afatinib vs Vinorelbine vs investigators’ choice (86% of these patients received WBRT or SRS prior to study enrolment). While two trials found no significant difference in OS, one trial found significant improvement in OS with Efaproxiral in addition to WBRT compared to WBRT alone (HR 0.52; 95%CI 0.332–0.816). No significant differences were found with PFS or rate of adverse events amongst treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Considering the high prevalence of breast cancer BM and our improved understanding of genomic/molecular features of these tumors, a greater number of RCTs dedicated at this disease are needed.

Combined treatment with reboxetine in depressed patients with no response to venlafaxine: a 6-week follow-up study

2007 ◽  
Vol 19 (5) ◽  
pp. 291-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cecilio Álamo ◽  
Francisco López-Muñoz ◽  
Gabriel Rubio ◽  
Pilar García-García ◽  
Antonio Pardo
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Combined Treatment ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Multicentric Study ◽  
Intent To Treat ◽  
Events Data ◽  
Clinical Global Impression Improvement

Objective:The purpose of present study was to evaluate the efficacy of the addition of reboxetine in patients that had not previously responded, or had done so only partially, over 6 weeks of conventional pharmacological treatment with venlafaxine.Methods:This open-label, prospective and multicentric study included 40 outpatients diagnosed with major depressive disorder according to the DSM-IV criteria. Efficacy was assessed using the 21-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) and the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I). Safety was evaluated by recording spontaneously reported adverse events. Data were analysed on an intent-to-treat basis, using the last-observation-carried-forward method.Results:Mean HAMD reduction was 34.9% (P < 0.0001). The percentages of responders (≥50% reduction in HAMD) and patients considered as benefiting from complete remission (HAMD ≤ 10 points) at week 6 were 27.5 and 12.5%, respectively. By the end of the treatment, the score of CGI-I decreased 24.8% (P < 0.0001). Percentage of patient improving (CGI < 4 points) was 47.5%. The most common non-serious adverse events were constipation, nervousness, anxiety and insomnia.Conclusion:These findings suggest that the combined treatment of reboxetine and venlafaxine, in venlafaxine-resistant patients, may be an effective and well-tolerated strategy.

A Moxifloxacin-based Regimen for the Treatment of Recurrent, Drug-sensitive Pulmonary Tuberculosis: An Open-label, Randomized, Controlled Trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
pp. 90-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rubeshan Perumal ◽  
Nesri Padayatchi ◽  
Nonhlanhla Yende-Zuma ◽  
Anushka Naidoo ◽  
Dhineshree Govender ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Absolute Risk ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Treatment Success ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Conversion Rates ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Culture Conversion

Abstract Background The substitution of moxifloxacin for ethambutol produced promising results for improved tuberculosis treatment outcomes. Methods We conducted an open-label, randomized trial to test whether a moxifloxacin-containing treatment regimen was superior to the standard regimen for the treatment of recurrent tuberculosis. The primary and secondary outcomes were the sputum culture conversion rate at the end of 8 weeks and the proportion of participants with a favorable outcome, respectively. Results We enrolled 196 participants; 69.9% were male and 70.4% were co-infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). There was no significant difference between the study groups in the proportion of patients achieving culture conversion at the end of 8 weeks (83.0% [moxifloxacin] vs 78.5% [control]; P = .463); however, the median time to culture conversion was significantly shorter (6.0 weeks, interquartile range [IQR] 4.0–8.3) in the moxifloxacin group than the control group (7.9 weeks, IQR 4.0– 11.4; P = .018). A favorable end-of-treatment outcome was reported in 86 participants (87.8%) in the moxifloxacin group and 93 participants (94.9%) in the control group, for an adjusted absolute risk difference of −5.5 (95% confidence interval −13.8 to 2.8; P = .193) percentage points. There were significantly higher proportions of participants with Grade 3 or 4 adverse events (43.9% [43/98] vs 25.5% [25/98]; P = .01) and serious adverse events (27.6% [27/98] vs 12.2% [12/98]; P = .012) in the moxifloxacin group. Conclusions The replacement of ethambutol with moxifloxacin did not significantly improve either culture conversion rates at the end of 8 weeks or treatment success, and was associated with a higher incidence of adverse events. Clinical Trials Registration NCT02114684.

CCTG BR.34: A randomized trial of durvalumab and tremelimumab +/- platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with metastatic (Stage IV) squamous or nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9502-9502 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natasha B. Leighl ◽  
Scott Andrew Laurie ◽  
Glenwood D. Goss ◽  
Brett Gordon Maxwell Hughes ◽  
Martin R. Stockler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Randomized Trial ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy ◽  
Significant Difference

9502 Background: First-line therapy for advanced NSCLC includes PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) monotherapy, and in combination with chemotherapy. Combination ICI have also demonstrated better survival compared to chemotherapy (CM-227). In CCTG BR.34, we compared overall survival (OS) in patients with advanced NSCLC receiving first-line durvalumab plus tremelimumab (DT) with or without platinum doublet chemotherapy (CT). Methods: This international, open-label, randomized trial accrued 301 participants from Canada and Australia, with stage IV NSCLC, EGFR/ALK wildtype, ECOG PS 0/1. Patients were randomized to DT for 4 cycles or DT+CT (pemetrexed- or gemcitabine-platinum), with ongoing D or D + pemetrexed (non-squamous) maintenance until disease progression. Stratification factors included histology, stage IVA v. IVB and smoking status. The primary endpoint was OS; secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR = CR + PR) and adverse events (AEs). Results: At a median follow up of 16.6 months, no significant difference in OS was seen between the two treatment arms, with a median OS of 16.6 months with DT+CT v. 14.1 months with DT, (estimated HR 0.88, 90% CI 0.67-1.16). PFS was significantly improved in the DT+CT arm (stratified HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.52-0.88; medians 7.7 v. 3.2 months). ORR was higher in the DT+CT arm, 28% v. 14%, (odds ratio 2.1, p=0.001). Preplanned subgroup analysis demonstrated no significant differences in treatment outcomes by plasma TMB (<20 v. ≥20 mut/Mb, Guardant OMNI), age, sex, or smoking status. There was a trend to improved OS with DT+CT in the subgroup with PD-L1 TPS≥50%, (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.40-1.04, p=0.07). Plasma TMB<20 mut/Mb was associated with shorter survival in both treatment groups (HR 1.99, 95% 1.3-3.1). Toxicity was greater in the DT+CT arm, with grade≥3 adverse events in 82% v. 70%, (p=0.02), most commonly dyspnea, nausea and cough. The incidence of immune-related adverse events was similar between arms (colitis 11%, pneumonitis 6%, endocrinopathy 21%). Grade 5 events occurred in 2.7%, (5 with DT+CT, 3 with DT). Conclusions: The addition of CT to first-line DT did not improve OS in advanced NSCLC. CT+DT improved ORR and PFS, and was associated with greater toxicity. No differential effects were seen by PD-L1 TPS nor bTMB. These data suggest that adding chemotherapy to ICI may be beneficial in those with PD-L1 TPS >=50%, and warrant further analysis in independent datasets. Clinical trial information: NCT03057106 .

scholarly journals Open-Label Adjunctive Topiramate in the Treatment of Unstable Bipolar Disorder

2005 ◽  
Vol 50 (7) ◽  
pp. 415-422 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger S McIntyre ◽  
Rosanna Riccardelli ◽  
Carin Binder ◽  
Vivek Kusumakar
Keyword(s):  
Bipolar Disorder ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Vital Signs ◽  
Mood Stabilizers ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Young Mania ◽  
Satisfaction With Treatment ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Intent To Treat

Objective: To assess open-label adjunctive topiramate in the treatment of outpatients with unstable bipolar disorder (BD). Method: Outpatients with DSM-IV–defined BD (I or II) exhibiting mood instability were enrolled in this 16-week, open-label, multicentre study. Topiramate was added to existing mood stabilizers and other psychotropic treatments. The primary effectiveness measure was the Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) scale; other scales included the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) and the Montgomery–Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Safety assessments included monitoring adverse events, measuring tremor, monitoring vital signs and weight, and laboratory indices. We also evaluated patient satisfaction with treatment. Results: A total of 109 patients were enrolled. Intent-to-treat analysis showed significant improvement from baseline in the CGI-S, YMRS, and MADRS, starting at Week 2 ( P < 0.001), with further accrual of benefit between Week 2 and Week 16 ( P < 0.001). The mean modal dosage of topiramate during the stable dosing period was 180 mg daily. There was a mean 1.8 kg decrease in patient weight from topiramate initiation to Week 16 ( P < 0.001). Topiramate was well tolerated by most patients; 11% withdrew from the study owing to adverse events. We noted a significant reduction in the mean severity score for preexisting tremor by Week 8 of treatment ( P < 0.005); no notable changes in vital signs were observed. At Week 16, 50% of the patients were “completely satisfied” with topiramate treatment. Conclusions: Adjunctive topiramate treatment can reduce the severity of manic and depressive symptoms, as well as reducing tremor and weight in outpatients with BD I or II.

scholarly journals FRI0228 TOFACITINIB IN THE TREATMENT OF SKIN AND MUSCULOSKELETAL INVOLVEMENT IN ADULT PATIENTS WITH EARLY SYSTEMIC SCLEROSIS, EVALUATED BY ULTRASOUND

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 697-697
Author(s):  
R. Karalilova ◽  
T. Sapundzhieva ◽  
Z. Batalov ◽  
M. Matucci-Cerinic ◽  
A. Batalov
Keyword(s):  
Systemic Sclerosis ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Pilot Trial ◽  
Skin Thickness ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Musculoskeletal Involvement

Background:The whole management of systemic sclerosis (SSc) remains to be defined while trials mainly focus on the treatment of different organ involvement and disease-modifying treatments are still not available.Objectives:To assess the safety and efficacy of tofacitinib (TOF) treatment on skin and musculoskeletal involvement as compared to methotrexate (MTX) treatment in patients with early SSc.Methods:In this 52-week, prospective, investigator-initiated, open-label, single-centre study, 66 patients with SSc were enrolled. Thirty-three patients received 5mg of oral TOF twice a day; and thirty-three received 7.5-10 mg of MTX weekly. The primary outcome measures were: skin fibrosis improvement at week 26, assessed by the reduction in skin thickness - evaluated by the modified Rodnan skin score (mRSS) and the ultrasound (US) measured skin thickness; improvement in the musculoskeletal involvement, assessed by the reduction in the joint and tendon score (US10SSc score); and adverse events from baseline to week 26. The dynamics in the outcome measures within each group were examined through Wilcoxon tests and between-group comparisons were performed through Mann-Whitney U and Chi-square tests.Results:At baseline, both groups of patients had similar median scores with no significant differences on all measures: mRSS (p = 0.589), US measured skin thickness (p = 0.822), and US10SSc score (p = 0.918). At week 26, significant differences were observed between the two treatment groups as the TOF treated patients showed a greater reduction in mRSS and musculoskeletal manifestations. In the TOF group, the median mRSS score decreased by 50% from 24 to 12 (IQR = 7.50) versus a smaller decrease of 8.70% in the MTX group, from 23 to 21 (IQR = 8.00), p < 0.001. The median US measured skin thickness in the TOF treated patients decreased by 12.87% from 1.71 to 1.49 (IQR =0.31) versus a decrease of 4.73%, from 1.69 to 1.61 (IQR =0.52) in the MTX group, p = 0.040. The US10SSc median score in the TOF group decreased by 56.25% from 16 to 7 (IQR = 6.50) versus a decrease of 12.5% in MTX group from 16 to 14 (IQR =10.50), p < 0.001. There was no significant difference between the groups in the number of adverse events from baseline to week 26. No cases of herpes zoster and deep vein thrombosis were observed in the TOF group.Conclusion:The data show that in early SSc TOF may lead to a significant improvement of skin thickness, measured with the mRSS and US, and of the musculoskeletal involvement, measured by the US10SSc score. TOF has also shown a satisfactory safety profile.References:[1]Elhai M, Boubaya M, Distler O, et al. Outcomes of patients with systemic sclerosis treated with rituximab in contemporary practice: a prospective cohort study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2019 Jul;78(7):979-987.[2]Khanna D, Denton CP, Lin CJF, et al. Safety and efficacy of subcutaneous tocilizumab in systemic sclerosis: results from the open-label period of a phase II randomised controlled trial (faSScinate). Ann Rheum Dis. 2018;77:212-220.[3]Gordon JK, Martyanov V, Franks JM, et al. Belimumab for the Treatment of Early Diffuse Systemic Sclerosis: Results of a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Pilot Trial. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018 Feb;70(2):308-316.Figure 1.Panel A - Dynamics in mRSS between baseline and week 26 in the MTX group;Panel B- Dynamics in mRSS between baseline and week 26 in the TOF group.Figure 2.Panel A - Dynamics in skin thickness between baseline and week 26 in the MTX group; Panel B - Dynamics in skin thickness between baseline and week 26 in the TOF group.Disclosure of Interests:Rositsa Karalilova: None declared, Tanya Sapundzhieva: None declared, Zguro Batalov: None declared, Marco Matucci-Cerinic Grant/research support from: Actelion, MSD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Speakers bureau: Acetelion, Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, Anastas Batalov: None declared

scholarly journals TO EVALUATE EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF RUPATADINE, BILASTINE, AND LEVOCETRIZINE IN ALLERGIC RHINITIS AT TERITARY CARE HOSPITAL, TELANGANA

2021 ◽  
pp. 140-143
Author(s):  
NAGUR SHARONE GRACE ◽  
SYED ARSHADDUDDIN AHMED ◽  
BHUVANESWARI E ◽  
SYED HAMZA QUADRI ◽  
VEENA B ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Allergic Rhinitis ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Nasal Congestion ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Government

Objective: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a heterogeneous disorder characterized by symptoms – sneezing, itching, nasal congestion, and rhinorrhea. The aim of the study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rupatadine, bilastine, and levocetirizine in AR. Methods: A prospective, open-label, comparative study was conducted at the Government ENT Hospital, Hyderabad, Telangana. Ninety patients diagnosed with AR were randomized, of whom Group 1 received oral tab. bilastine 20 mg once daily, Group 2 received oral tab. levocetirizine 5 mg once daily, and Group 3 received oral tab. rupatadine with a dose of 10 mg once daily for 2 weeks. The reduction in total nasal symptom score (TNSS) and absolute eosinophil counts (AECs) was compared with baseline and at 2 weeks. Safety was assessed according to adverse events reported during the study period. An analysis of variance was used as a test of significance for the three groups. Results: Overall, 90 cases were included in the study, with 48% of males and 52% of females. All three drugs significantly reduced the TNSS and AEC after treatment compared to before treatment (p<0.05). The mean difference in TNSS and AEC showed no statistically significant difference among the three groups (TNSS: p>0.908 and AEC: p>0.967). In terms of safety, all three drugs showed nearly similar adverse events. Conclusion: In this study, after 2 weeks of follow-up, the three drugs (bilastine, levocetirizine, and rupatadine) showed significant improvement clinically, but the mean reduction in the score of symptoms and AEC was not statistically significant in the treatment of AR.

scholarly journals Comparison of clinical outcomes of sitagliptin+metformin combination and glimepiride in the management of uncomplicated type 2 diabetics

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 16
Author(s):  
Jarinabanu Tahashildar ◽  
Ravi Shekhar Singh ◽  
Jameela Tahashildar
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Diabetic Patients ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Type 2 Diabetics ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Background: To evaluate the comparison of clinical outcomes of sitagliptin +metformin and glimepride in uncomplicated Type-2 diabetics.Methods: This one year (July 2016 to August 2017) prospective, open label, observational clinical cohort study was carried out on type-2 diabetics. In this study 299 Type-2 diabetics patients were enrolled and were randomly allocated to two groups viz Group A and Group B. Group A received sitaglitin+metformin (50+500) mg/day and Group B received glimepride 1mg/day respectively. The follow up started after 10 days of stabilization of the patient and data recorded on 10th day was considered Zero month data and follow up continued up to Six month in each group. Comparison of FPG, PPG and HbA1c was evaluated between zero and six months within group and at six month between groups. Adverse events were recorded and summarized by treatment group.Results: At the end of six months follow up the patients of Group A who received sitaglitin+metformin (50+500) mg/day had greater reduction in FPG, PPG and HbA1c (all P<0.001) was recorded when compared between zero and six month within group. A significant reduction in FPG, PPG and HbA1c (all P<0.01) also recorded in Group B who received glimepride 1mg/day when compared between zero and six months within group. A statically significant difference (all P<0.05) was recorded at six months between group. The adverse events like hypoglycemic episodes, gastrointestinal adverse events etc were greater in Group B than Group A. Changes in weight also noted in both Groups. Weight loss in Group A and weight gain in Group B was recorded.Conclusions: The present study suggests that a significant difference may be existing in the clinical outcome interm of glycemia control and adverse events between sitagliptin+metformin combination and glimepride in type-2 diabetic patients.

scholarly journals A randomized phase II trial of efficacy and safety of the immunotherapy ALECSAT as an adjunct to radiotherapy and temozolomide for newly diagnosed glioblastoma

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katja Werlenius ◽  
Giuseppe Stragliotto ◽  
Michael Strandeus ◽  
Malin Blomstrand ◽  
Helena Carén ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background There is an urgent need for effective treatments against glioblastoma (GBM). In this trial we investigated the efficacy and safety of an adoptive cell-based immunotherapy. Methods Patients with newly diagnosed GBM were recruited at four study sites in Sweden. The patients were randomized 1:2 to receive either radiotherapy (RT), 60 Gy/30 fractions, with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ) only, or RT and TMZ with addition of Autologous Lymphoid Effector Cells Specific Against Tumor (ALECSAT) in an open-label phase II trial. Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were survival and safety of ALECSAT. Results Sixty-two patients were randomized to either RT and TMZ alone (n=22) or RT and TMZ with ALECSAT (n=40). Median age was 57 years (range 38-69), 95% of the patients were in good performance status (WHO 0-1). There was no significant difference between the study arms (SOC vs. ALECSAT + SOC) in PFS (7.9 vs. 7.8 months; HR 1.28; 95% CI 0.70, 2.36; P=0.42), or in median overall survival (OS) (18.3 vs. 19.2 months; HR 1.16, 95% CI 0.58, 2.31; P=0.67). The treatment groups were balanced in terms of serious adverse events (52.4% vs. 52.5%), but adverse events ≥ grade 3 were more common in the experimental arm (81.0% vs. 92.5%). Conclusion Addition of ALECSAT immunotherapy to standard treatment with radiochemotherapy was well tolerated but did not improve PFS or OS for patients with newly diagnosed GBM.

Safety, tolerability and efficacy of a rapid dose escalation of quetiapine in bipolar I mania: the FATIMA study

2009 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 125-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Constant ◽  
Arlette Seghers ◽  
Enio Ranalli ◽  
Vincent Ryckmans ◽  
Phillippe Snauwaert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Adverse Drug Reactions ◽  
Dose Escalation ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Vital Signs ◽  
Severity Of Illness ◽  
Manic Episode ◽  
Drug Reactions ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Young Mania

Objective:The FATIMA study (FAst TItration of quetiapine fumarate in bipolar I MAnia) evaluated the safety, tolerability and efficacy of a rapid dose escalation of quetiapine in acutely ill bipolar I patients experiencing a manic episode.Methods:In an open-label, phase II pilot study, 29 patients aged 18 years or older, hospitalised with a bipolar I manic episode, received quetiapine twice daily for 21 days. Quetiapine was administered at 200, 400, 600, then 800 mg/day on the first 4 days, with flexible dosing (400–800 mg/day) subsequently. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patient dropouts because of adverse drug reactions during the first 7 days. Secondary safety assessments included incidences of adverse drug reactions and significant changes in vital signs. Efficacy assessments included Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) and Clinical Global Impressions Severity of Illness (CGI-S) score changes from day 1 to day 21.Results:Twenty patients (69%) completed the study. No patients withdrew as a result of drug-related adverse events (AEs) during the first 7 days. Twenty-three patients reported 58 adverse events, and most of the adverse events were mild or moderate. No clinically relevant abnormalities in vital signs were reported. Mean YMRS and CGI-S scores decreased significantly from baseline to day 21 (p < 0.001). Response and remission rates were 78 and 70%, respectively, at the end of the study.Conclusion:Rapid dose escalation of quetiapine to 800 mg/day over 4 days was well tolerated and effective in reducing symptoms within 5 days in acutely ill bipolar I patients with a manic episode.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document