Is it Worth CANVASing for CREDENCE? A Benefit-risk Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 509-514
Author(s):  
Binayak Sinha ◽  
Samit Ghosal

Background and Aims: A number of significant positive and negative signals emerged from the CANVAS Program and CREDENCE trial with the use of canagliflozin. These signals are confusing. A Likelihood of being Helped of Harmed (LHH) analysis was conducted to determine the risk, benefit ratio associated with canagliflozin use and address the signals as a continuum. Materials &Methods: LHH was calculated from the number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed to harm (NNH) available from the absolute risk reductions reported with the outcomes of interest, in these two trials. Results: In the CANVAS Program, LHH for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) points at a significant benefit with canagliflozin use in comparison to amputation (1.65), fractures (1.65) and euglycaemic diabetic ketoacidosis (euDKA) (16.67) risks. Only genital fungal infections were significant more in both sexes (0.21-M and 0.1-F) when LHH was matched against the positive outcomes. In contrast, the hHF benefits were outweighed by amputation (0.95) and fracture risks (0.95). : In CREDENCE trial, the LHH for Primary composite, Renal composite and MACE, all supported the benefits in comparison to any adverse events encountered in the trial. : The LHH from pooled data (CANVAS Program and CREDENCE trial) was in favour of all the benefits (hHF and renal composites) except for MACE matched against amputation (0.66). Conclusion: The outcome benefits were in favour of canagliflozin in comparison to all reported adverse events, when hHF and renal composite were under consideration, in both the individual and pooled LHH analysis. However, the MACE benefits were overwhelmed by amputation risk in the pooled analysis.

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 124-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arman Qamar ◽  
David A Morrow ◽  
Mark A Creager ◽  
Benjamin M Scirica ◽  
Jeffrey W Olin ◽  
...  

Intensive antithrombotic therapy reduces major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and major adverse limb events (MALE) in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD). Recent studies have suggested heterogeneity in risk and benefit in those with and without concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD) and peripheral revascularization. We evaluated the risk of MACE and MALE in patients with PAD stratified by history of concomitant CAD and prior peripheral revascularization and whether the efficacy and safety of vorapaxar were similar in these subgroups. The TRA 2°P-TIMI 50 trial randomized 26,449 patients with prior MI, ischemic stroke, or PAD to vorapaxar or placebo. This analysis examined the effect of vorapaxar in a broad population of 6136 patients with PAD. Overall, vorapaxar significantly reduced MACE (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73, 0.99; p = 0.034) and MALE (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53, 0.92; p = 0.011) in patients with PAD. The absolute risk reduction (ARR) for MACE was greater in patients with PAD and CAD versus those with PAD alone (–2.2% vs 0.1%: number needed to treat (NNT) 45 vs 1000). Conversely, the ARR for MALE was higher in those with prior lower extremity revascularization (2.5% vs 0.2%: NNT 40 vs 500). Vorapaxar increased major bleeding (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.12, 1.71; p = 0.003). The net clinical outcome in all patients with PAD was reduced with vorapaxar (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72, 0.94; p = 0.004), with benefits driven by reductions in MACE for those with CAD and by reductions in MALE for those with prior peripheral revascularization. Among patients with PAD, vorapaxar resulted in a net clinical benefit; however, the drivers of benefit were heterogeneous, with greater reductions in MACE in those with concomitant CAD and greater reductions in MALE in those with prior lower extremity revascularization, and unclear benefit in patients with neither. These clinical characteristics may be useful in identifying the subgroups of patients with PAD most likely to benefit from potent antithrombotic therapies. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00526474


2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 153-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew D. Goodman ◽  
Theodore R. Brown ◽  
Randall T. Schapiro ◽  
Michael Klingler ◽  
Ron Cohen ◽  
...  

Background: Two phase 3 clinical trials demonstrated that dalfampridine extended-release 10-mg tablets (D-ER), twice daily, significantly improved walking relative to placebo in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of D-ER in patients with MS using pooled data from the two phase 3 trials. Methods: Data were pooled from the two trials, and D-ER was compared with placebo for timed-walk responder rate, changes in walking speed, and the 12-item Multiple Sclerosis Walking Scale (MSWS-12). Response rates were evaluated with respect to demographic and clinical characteristics. Results: D-ER had a significantly higher proportion of timed-walk responders relative to placebo (37.6% vs. 8.9%; P < .0001). The responder rate was independent of age, gender, race, body-mass index, type of MS, duration of MS, baseline Expanded Disability Status Scale score, baseline walking speed, and concomitant use of immunomodulatory therapies. Significant improvements were observed in walking speed and in MSWS-12 score for the pooled D-ER group compared with placebo. The safety profile was consistent with the individual studies; no new safety or tolerability concerns were identified. Conclusions: D-ER demonstrated efficacy for the improvement of walking in patients with MS; response was independent of demographic and clinical characteristics.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Al khazaali ◽  
Alexis Mckee ◽  
Anjul Sharma ◽  
Stewart Albert

Abstract Background: Cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOT) of glucagon-like peptide-1receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) demonstrated reduction of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), cardiovascular deaths (CVD), and renal outcomes (RO). Objective. Evaluation of data to assist in the prescribing decision with regard to severity of illness and risk for adverse events. Study Design: Systemic review of the major CVOT and previous meta-analyses. Main Outcome Measures: Analysis of six trials on GLP-1 RA and 4 trials on SGLT2i, showed both drug classes reduced MACE and CVD compared to controls, with neither class preferred (comparison GLP1-RA vs SGLT2i: (relative rate, rr MACE= 1.09, 95%CI;0.98,1.22, p= 0.129; rr, CVD =1.04, CI;0.87,1.24, p=0.657). Hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) improved with SGLT2i (rr=0.68, CI; 0.61,0.76, p<0.001) but not with GLP-1 RA, (rr = 0.94, CI; 0.86,1.03, p=0.17). Both GLP-1 RA and SGLT2i showed significant reduction in RO (GLP-1RA, rr=0.83, CI; 0.75,0.912, p=<0.001, SGLT2i, rr=0.0.67, CI; 0.57,0.79, p=0.001) without a preferential difference between the classes (GLP-1 RA vs SGLT2i, relative difference (rd) =0.005, CI;-0.011,0.021, p=0.532, number needed to treat (NNT)=200). Serious adverse events (SAE) for SGLT2i were predominantly mycotic genital infections in women (number needed to harm (NNH) =13 and diabetic ketoacidosis NNH=595. Gastrointestinal intolerance was the major SAE in the GLP1-RA class (NNH=35). Conclusion: Both GLP-1 RA and SGLT2i classes showed similar reduction in MACE, CVD, and RO. SGLT2i have advantages over GLP-1 RA in reduction in HHF especially in those with more severe cardiovascular disease risk.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3018-3018
Author(s):  
Mitchell Steven Anscher ◽  
Shaily Arora ◽  
Chana Weinstock ◽  
Rachael Lubitz ◽  
Anup Amatya ◽  
...  

3018 Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are widely used in the treatment of multiple advanced malignancies. Radiotherapy (RT) has been used in combination with ICIs to activate tumor-specific T cell responses, and RT also promotes non-specific acute and chronic inflammatory responses both locally and systemically. More than 50% of patients receive RT at some point during their course of cancer therapy, and relatively little information is available pertaining to the impact of RT, if any, on the risk of adverse events (AEs) in patients receiving ICIs. Methods: Pooled data from prospective trials of ICIs submitted to the FDA in initial or supplemental BLAs or NDAs through 12/2019 were included (N=66). Trials from applications that were withdrawn or not approved were not included. Patients were subdivided by whether or not radiotherapy was administered at any time during the course of their cancer treatment. AEs common to both ICI treatment and RT were identified to focus on the following reactions: neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, colitis, hepatitis, pneumonitis, and myocarditis. Descriptive statistics were used to examine AEs associated with the use of radiation and ICIs. Results: A total of 25,836 patients were identified, of which 9087 (35%) received RT and 16,749 (65%) did not. Radiation was associated with similar rates of AEs overall with numerically higher hematologic toxicities and pneumonitis and numerically lower colitis, hepatitis and myocarditis (Table). Patients receiving RT were more likely to experience Grade 3-5 hematologic toxicities compared to those not receiving RT. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the largest report of AE risk associated with the use of radiation and ICIs. Our results show that the incidence of hematologic toxicity and pneumonitis in patients receiving RT may be slightly higher. Analysis to determine comparability of baseline demographic characteristics, comprehensive AE profile, and timing of RT is underway. [Table: see text]


Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 2880-2880 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Almeida ◽  
Valeria Santini ◽  
Stefanie Gröpper ◽  
Anna Jonasova ◽  
Norbert Vey ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: Anemia represents the main therapeutic challenge in pts with lower-risk MDS (Fenaux P, Adès L. Blood. 2013;121:4280-6). Prospective studies evaluating LEN for the treatment of red blood cell transfusion-dependent pts showed significant clinical activity in both non-del(5q) and del(5q) International Prognostic Scoring System-defined lower-risk MDS (Raza A, et al. Blood. 2008;111:86-93; Santini V, et al. Blood. 2014;124:abstract 409; List A, et al. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:1456-65; Fenaux P, et al. Blood. 2011;118:3765-76). Hematologic adverse events (AEs) are common, but manageable, with LEN treatment (Giagounidis A, et al. Ann Hematol. 2008;87:345-52). However, there has been no direct comparison of safety profiles in non-del(5q) and del(5q) pts. This pooled analysis compared the incidence of AEs in LEN-treated lower-risk MDS pts with or without del(5q). Methods: This retrospective analysis of pooled data from 7 prospective clinical trials compared the incidence of AEs in LEN-treated lower-risk MDS pts with or without del(5q). The non-del(5q) group included 416 pts from 4 studies: MDS-005 (n = 160), MDS-002 (n = 215), MDS-001 (n = 24), and PK-002 (n = 17). The del(5q) group included 243 pts from 5 studies: MDS-003 (n = 148), MDS-004 (n = 69), MDS-007 (n = 11), MDS-001 (n = 8), and PK-002 (n = 7). A TEAE was defined as an AE that began or worsened in severity on or after the first dose of LEN through to 28 days after the last dose of LEN. Pts received the recommended starting dose of 10 mg LEN for ≥ 1 cycle; in study MDS-005, pts with impaired creatinine clearance (CrCl; ≥ 40 to < 60 mL/min) had a LEN 5 mg starting dose in order to achieve a similar area under the curve as pts with normal CrCl who were receiving LEN 10 mg. Results: Among the LEN-treated lower-risk MDS pts with or without del(5q) in this pooled analysis, the most commonly reported TEAEs (any grade) occurring in ≥ 5% of pts were hematologic: neutropenia [49.3% vs 73.7% for non-del(5q) vs del(5q), respectively], thrombocytopenia (37.3% vs 64.2%), and anemia (16.8% vs 20.2%). Overall, 84.6% of non-del(5q) pts and 96.3% of del(5q) pts experienced grade 3-4 hematologic TEAEs, including neutropenia [45.2% vs 72.0% for non-del(5q) and del(5q), respectively], thrombocytopenia (31.3% vs 52.7%), and anemia (11.8% vs 12.8%) (Table). Non-hematologic TEAEs were similar for both non-del(5q) and del(5q) pts, except deep-vein thrombosis (1.2% vs 4.9%, respectively) and hypertension (0.2% vs 3.7%). Acute myeloid leukemia was reported as a TEAE in 3 non-del(5q) and 9 del(5q) pts. Bleeding events (any grade) occurring concurrently with grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia were observed in 20.7% of non-del(5q) and 24.4% of del(5q) pts. Infection (any grade) occurring concurrently with grade 3-4 neutropenia was observed in 33.6% of non-del(5q) and 54.0% of del(5q) pts. Analysis of grade 3-4 hematologic TEAEs for pts receiving long-term (> 12 months) LEN treatment by time of onset (0 to 6, > 6 to 12, and > 12 to 18 months) showed that onset rates of grade 3-4 neutropenia during the first 6 months were higher versus rates at > 6 to 12 months for non-del(5q) (42.9% vs 19.5%, respectively) and del(5q) pts (65.4% vs 21.3%). Rates decreased similarly for thrombocytopenia in non-del(5q) (13.0% vs 5.2%) and del(5q) pts (40.4% vs 6.6%). At > 12 to 18 months, onset rates of neutropenia and thrombocytopenia for non-del(5q) pts were 15.6% and 9.1%, respectively; rates for del(5q) pts during this period were 23.5% and 4.4%. Grade 3-4 TEAEs resulted in discontinuation of LEN in 27.4% of non-del(5q) and 20.6% of del(5q) pts (Table); however, the criteria for discontinuation differed between studies. Conclusions: In this analysis of pooled data from 7 studies, the safety profiles of LEN-treated lower-risk MDS pts were similar between non-del(5q) and del(5q) pts. Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were the most common TEAEs in both groups; however, the frequency of these TEAEs was lower in non-del(5q) pts. Among non-del(5q) and del(5q) pts receiving long-term treatment with LEN, onset rates of thrombocytopenia and neutropenia were lower at > 6 to 12 months versus the first 6 months of treatment. In summary, TEAEs in lower-risk MDS pts with or without del(5q) treated with LEN 10 mg for ≥ 1 cycle are predictable, well characterized, and clinically manageable. Disclosures Almeida: Shire: Speakers Bureau; Bristol Meyer Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide used to treat MDS patients without del(5q). Santini:celgene, Janssen, Novartis, Onconova: Honoraria, Research Funding. Vey:Celgene: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Giagounidis:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria. Hellström-Lindberg:Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Mufti:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Skikne:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hoenekopp:Celgene International: Employment, Equity Ownership. Séguy:Celgene International: Employment. Zhong:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fenaux:CELGENE: Honoraria, Research Funding; NOVARTIS: Honoraria, Research Funding; AMGEN: Honoraria, Research Funding; JANSSEN: Honoraria, Research Funding.


2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 134-136
Author(s):  
George E. Guthrie

Patients are often not aware of the reversibility of chronic lifestyle-related diseases and most physicians are not telling them. The present practice of communicating treatment effectiveness with relative risk reductions does not allow clinicians or patients to evaluate the relative effectiveness of our technotherapies or lifestyle interventions. Clinicians should use the clarity of “number needed to treat,” “number needed to harm,” and absolute risk in communicating with patients about all available therapies and then empower the patient to make the choices that fit their needs best.


2011 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 352-358 ◽  
Author(s):  
MARC C. HOCHBERG ◽  
MADELAINE WOHLREICH ◽  
PAULA GAYNOR ◽  
SYLVIA HANNA ◽  
RICK RISSER

Objective.To determine response with duloxetine versus placebo in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee using the Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials-Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI) responder index and other clinically relevant outcomes including minimal clinically important improvement (MCII) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) for pain and function.Methods.Data were pooled from two 13-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials comparing duloxetine 60 to 120 mg/day with placebo in patients with symptomatic OA of the knee. Treatment response was determined according to the OMERACT-OARSI responder index, ≥ 30% pain reduction, ≥ 50% pain reduction, and MCII and PASS for pain and function. (ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers NCT00433290 and NCT00408421)Results.Duloxetine-treated patients were 33% more likely to experience an OMERACT-OARSI response than placebo-treated patients [p < 0.001, number needed to treat (NNT) = 6]. A significantly greater percentage of duloxetine-treated patients, compared with placebo-treated patients, reported ≥ 30% improvement in pain from baseline to endpoint (p < 0.001, NNT = 5) and ≥ 50% improvement in pain relative to baseline (p < 0.001, NNT = 7). The duloxetine-treated patients were also more likely to fulfill MCII criteria for pain (p < 0.001, NNT = 6) and function (p < 0.001, NNT = 7), and to achieve PASS for pain (p < 0.001, NNT = 6) and function (p = 0.009, NNT = 9). More duloxetine-treated patients compared with placebo-treated patients experienced ≥ 1 treatment-emergent adverse event (p = 0.003, number needed to harm = 8).Conclusion.Significantly more patients receiving duloxetine than placebo achieved an OMERACT-OARSI response, improvements in pain and function exceeding the level accepted as MCII, and reached PASS. Results support the clinical relevance of outcomes of prior duloxetine studies in symptomatic OA of the knee.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erich Seifritz ◽  
Michael Friede ◽  
Jörg Schnitker

Abstract Background: Brexpiprazole and aripiprazole are atypical antipsychotics that act as partial agonists at the dopamine D2 receptor. No head-to-head trial comparing brexpiprazole and aripiprazole in the treatment of schizophrenia is available. Here, we carry out a systematic review and comparison of the efficacy and safety of brexpiprazole and aripiprazole in schizophrenia treatment.Methods: We employed an indirect meta-analysis to determine effect sizes from randomised placebo-controlled trials with brexpiprazole and aripiprazole in the acute treatment of schizophrenia. We compared responder rates, incidences of adverse events and serious adverse events, the number needed to treat (NNT) for response, number needed to harm (NNH) for adverse events or treatment discontinuation, and likelihood to be helped or harmed (LHH) as efficacy and safety indices of the two drugs. Results: Five studies for each drug were included in the analysis. Similar risk differences vs. placebo were observed for responder rates under brexpiprazole (10.2%, p = 0.0015) and aripiprazole (10.3%, p = 0.0003). Higher incidences of adverse events and serious adverse events were seen under aripiprazole compared with brexpiprazole, however, the risk differences were not statistically significant. The NNT for response was 11 for both substances. For brexpiprazole compared with placebo, we did not find an increase of adverse events (NNH = 27, not significant), however, we found an increased number of adverse events for aripiprazole versus placebo (NNH = 17, p < 0.05). For both drugs, benefits were encountered more often than harms, with an LHH for any adverse event of 2.41 for brexpiprazole and 1.56 for aripiprazole, respectively. Conclusions: The likelihood to be helped rather than harmed was greater with brexpiprazole compared to aripiprazole for the total rate of adverse events (ratio of brexpiprazole LHH/aripiprazole LHH = 1.54).


Gut ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 446-453 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samir Gupta ◽  
Elizabeth T Jacobs ◽  
John A Baron ◽  
David A Lieberman ◽  
Gwen Murphy ◽  
...  

ObjectiveFor individuals with 1–2 small (<1 cm) low-risk colorectal adenomas, international guidelines range from no surveillance to offering surveillance colonoscopy in 5–10 years. We hypothesised that the risks for metachronous advanced neoplasia (AN) among patients with low-risk adenomas differ based on clinical factors distinct from those currently used.DesignWe pooled data from seven prospective studies to assess the risk of metachronous AN. Two groups with 1–2 small adenomas were defined based on guidelines from the UK (n=4516) or the European Union (EU)/US (n=2477).ResultsAbsolute risk of metachronous AN ranged from a low of 2.9% to a high of 12.2%, depending on specific risk factor and guideline used. For the UK group, the highest absolute risks for metachronous AN were found among individuals with a history of prior polyp (12.2%), villous histology (12.2%), age ≥70 years (10.9%), high-grade dysplasia (10.9%), any proximal adenoma (10.2%), distal and proximal adenoma (10.8%) or two adenomas (10.1%). For the EU/US group, the highest absolute risks for metachronous AN were among individuals with a history of prior polyp (11.5%) or the presence of both proximal and distal adenomas (11.0%). In multivariate analyses, strong associations for increasing age and history of prior polyps and odds of metachronous AN were observed, whereas more modest associations were shown for baseline proximal adenomas and those with villous features.ConclusionsRisks of metachronous AN among individuals with 1–2 small adenomas vary according to readily available clinical characteristics. These characteristics may be considered for recommending colonoscopy surveillance and require further investigation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document