scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Nebivolol and Rosuvastatin Combination Treatment in Patients with Concomitant Hypertension and Hyperlipidemia

2020 ◽  
Vol Volume 14 ◽  
pp. 5005-5017
Author(s):  
Moo-Yong Rhee ◽  
Cheol Ho Kim ◽  
Youngkeun Ahn ◽  
Joon-Han Shin ◽  
Seung Hwan Han ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Combination Treatment ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Concomitant Hypertension

scholarly journals A Prospective Randomized, Double-Blind, Multi-Center, Phase III Clinical Trial Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Olmesartan/Amlodipine plus Rosuvastatin Combination Treatment in Patients with Concomitant Hypertension and Dyslipidemia: A LEISURE Study

2022 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 350
Author(s):  
Sang-Ho Jo ◽  
Seok Min Kang ◽  
Byung Su Yoo ◽  
Young Soo Lee ◽  
Ho Joong Youn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Combination Treatment ◽  
Reaction Rates ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Phase Iii Clinical Trial ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Single Pill ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Concomitant Hypertension

Background: This study was a multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled phase III clinical trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of an olmesartan/amlodipine single pill plus rosuvastatin combination treatment for patients with concomitant hypertension and dyslipidemia. Methods: Patients with both hypertension and dyslipidemia aged 20–80 were enrolled from 36 tertiary hospitals in Korea from January 2017 to April 2018. Patients were randomized to three groups in a 1:1:0.5 ratio, olmesartan/amlodipine single pill plus rosuvastatin (olme/amlo/rosu) or olmesartan plus rosuvastatin (olme/rosu) or olmesartan/amlodipine single pill (olme/amlo) combination. The primary endpoints were change of sitting systolic blood pressure (sitSBP) from baseline in the olme/amlo/rosu vs. olme/rosu groups and the percentage change of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) from baseline in the olme/amlo/rosu vs. olme/amlo groups after 8 weeks of treatment. Results: A total of 265 patients were randomized, 106 to olme/amlo/rosu, 106 to olme/rosu and 53 to olme/amlo groups. Baseline characteristics among the three groups did not differ. The mean sitSBP change was significantly larger in the olme/amlo/rosu group with −24.30 ± 12.62 mmHg (from 153.58 ± 10.90 to 129.28 ± 13.58) as compared to the olme/rosu group, −9.72 ± 16.27 mmHg (from 153.71 ± 11.10 to 144.00 ± 18.44 mmHg). The difference in change of sitSBP between the two groups was −14.62± 1.98 mmHg with significance (95% CI −18.51 to −10.73, p < 0.0001). The mean LDL-C reduced significantly in the olme/amlo/rosu group, −52.31 ± 16.63% (from 154.52 ± 30.84 to 72.72 ± 26.08 mg/dL) as compared to the olme/amlo group with no change, −2.98 ± 16.16% (from 160.42 ± 32.05 to 153.81 ± 31.57 mg/dL). Significant difference in change was found in LDL-C between the two groups with −50.10 ± 2.73% (95% CI −55.49 to −44.71, p < 0.0001). Total adverse drug reaction rates were 10.48%, 5.66% and 3.7% in the olme/amlo/rosu, olme/rosu and olme/amlo groups, respectively with no statistical significance among the three groups. Serious adverse drug reactions did not occur. Conclusions: Olmesartan/amlodipine single pill plus rosuvastatin combination treatment for patients with both hypertension and dyslipidemia is effective and safe as compared to either olmesartan plus rosuvastatin or olmesartan plus amlodipine treatment.

In vitro and in vivo efficacy and safety of tumor treating fields (TTFields) and sorafenib combination in hepatocellular carcinoma.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 551-551
Author(s):  
Shiri Davidi ◽  
Catherine Tempel-Brami ◽  
Mijal Munster ◽  
Karnit Gotlib ◽  
Einav Zeevi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Treatment Group ◽  
Combination Treatment ◽  
Combined Treatment ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Tumor Treating Fields ◽  
Clonogenic Potential ◽  
Hcc Cells

551 Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading global cause of cancer-related mortality. Sorafenib (oral multikinase inhibitor) is approved in patients with advanced HCC, yet survival benefit is limited. Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) are an effective, anti-neoplastic treatment modality delivered via noninvasive, low intensity (1-3 V/cm), intermediate frequency (100-500 kHz), alternating electric fields. The study aim was to explore in vitro and in vivo effects of TTFields alone and combined with sorafenib for HCC treatment. Methods: HCC (HepG2 and Huh-7D12) cells were TTFields treated with at frequencies of 100-400 kHz for 72 hr using the inovitro system. Efficacy of TTFields and sorafenib combined treatment was tested at optimal frequency with various sorafenib concentrations. Cell counts, apoptosis induction, and clonogenic potential were determined. Healthy rats were used to assess safety of TTFields applied to the abdomen. N1S1 HCC cells were injected into the left hepatic lobe of Sprague Dawley rat; after 1 week, TTFields (1.2 V/cm) and sorafenib (10 mg/kg) were applied for 6 days. Tumor growth was evaluated using MRI. Results: The optimal TTFields frequency was 150 kHz in HepG2 and Huh-7D12 HCC cells. TTFields 150 kHz treatment (1.0 - 1.7 V/cm, 72 hr) led to cell count reductions (53-55%) and further decreases in clonogenic potential (65-69%). TTFields and sorafenib combination treatment led to a significant reduction in cell count (2-way ANOVA, P < 0.05) vs either treatment alone. Also, tumor growth was significantly reduced in the combined treatment group vs the control group (student t test, P < 0.01). Tumor volume (fold increase) in the combination treatment group (1.6) was significantly lower vs control (5.9, P < 0.0001), TTFields alone (3.3, P < 0.01), and sorafenib alone (2.3, P < 0.05) groups. Safety studies did not reveal any TTFields related adverse events with delivery to the rat abdomen. Conclusions: In vitro and in vivo data demonstrated efficacy and safety of TTFields in HCC; and improved efficacy in combination with sorafenib. A phase 2 study (HEPANOVA; NCT03606590) will explore the clinical potential of TTFields 150 kHz plus sorafenib.

Efficacy and safety of initial combination treatment with sitagliptin and pioglitazone-a factorial study

2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 223-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. R. Henry ◽  
B. Staels ◽  
V. A. Fonseca ◽  
M. Z. Chou ◽  
R. Teng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Combination Treatment ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Initial Combination

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of the Combination Treatment of Rituximab and Dexamethasone for Adults with Primary Immune Thrombocytopenia (ITP): A Meta-Analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jia Wang ◽  
Ya Li ◽  
Chong Wang ◽  
Yayue Zhang ◽  
Chong Gao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Combination Treatment ◽  
Immune Thrombocytopenia ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Primary Immune Thrombocytopenia

Objective.To conduct a meta-analysis, assessing the efficacy and safety of the combination treatment of dexamethasone and rituximab for adults with ITP (primary immune thrombocytopenia).Methods.Randomized controlled trials that compared rituximab and dexamethasone combination treatment to dexamethasone monotherapy in the treatment of adults with ITP were collected by searching Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane, China National Knowledge (CNKI), Wanfang database, and Sino Med. We conducted pooled analyses on OR (overall response) rate, CR (complete response) rate, PR (partial response) rate, SR (sustained response) rate, R (relapse) rate, change in Treg cell count (mean [SD]), and AE (adverse event). GRADE pro scale was used to assess the quality of the evidence. Publication bias was assessed with Egger’s test method.Results.A total of 11 randomized controlled trials were eligible for inclusion. The overall efficacy estimates favored combination arm in terms of OR rate at month 3, CR rate at week 4 and month 3, SR rate, and Treg cell count at week 2. Subgroup analysis showed that females obtained a higher OR rate than males did at week 4. No significant difference was found in pooled analysis of relapse rate between combination arm and monotherapy arm. The comparison of serious AE and other AEs showed no significant difference either. A total of 19 outcomes were assessed by GRADE pro software, of which 79% (15/19) was scaled as moderate-to-high level. Publication bias existed in studies on OR at week 4 (P=0.025), CR at week 4 (P=0.017), infection (P=0.006), and rash (P=0.028) of the AEs.Conclusion.Dexamethasone combined with rituximab can provide a better long-term response in the treatment of adults with ITP and will not increase the risk of adverse effects.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document