Therapeutic Potential of Probiotics: A Ray of Hope or Nightmare?

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Malika Arora ◽  
Navdeep Kaur ◽  
Parveen Bansal ◽  
Ashish Baldi
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Oral Health ◽  
Mode Of Action ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Therapeutic Potential ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Regulatory Guidelines ◽  
Health And Disease

Background:The role of various probiotic microorganisms with a particular emphasis on their therapeutic use in human health and disease has been highlighted by diverse scientific research reports. Due to improvement and introduction of new technologies useful to understand the functionality and mode of action of probiotics with respect to nutritional as well as health perspectives, the research on probiotics has recently grabbed the attention of manufacturers, regulators as well as researchers. Currently there are clinical trial based evidences to support the effectiveness of probiotic interventions in various types of diarrheal diseases, chronic gastrointestinal inflammatory disorders, hypercholesterolemia, hypertension, diabetes, oral health etc. However, due to inadequate awareness about risks associated with the probiotics amongst physicians, regulatory authorities, consumers and manufacturers many attributes like quality, safety and efficacy require urgent attention. At the same time regulatory guidelines for these products face ambiguity. So, it is of utmost importance to evaluate the true status of probiotic products available in market with respect to all above mentioned parameters and to formulate harmonized regulatory guidelines for the manufacturing of probiotic products.Conclusion:The present compilation aims to highlight the progression of probiotic research related to therapeutic potentials of probiotics, clinical trials on probiotics, risks and regulatory concerns associated with probiotics and their use.

Repurposed Antiviral Drugs for the Treatment of COVID-19: Syntheses, Mechanism of Infection and Clinical Trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Subha Sankar Paul ◽  
Goutam Biswas
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Small Molecule ◽  
Mode Of Action ◽  
Antiviral Drugs ◽  
Public Health Emergency ◽  
Advanced Stage ◽  
Clinical Trial Results

: COVID-19 is a public health emergency of international concern. Although, considerable knowledge has been acquired with time about the viral mechanism of infection and mode of replication, yet no specific drugs or vaccines have been discovered against SARS-CoV-2, till date. There are few small molecule antiviral drugs like Remdesivir and Favipiravir which have shown promising results in different advanced stage of clinical trials. Chloroquinine, Hydroxychloroquine, and Lopinavir-Ritonavir combination, although initially was hypothesized to be effective against SARS-CoV-2, are now discontinued from the solidarity clinical trials. This review provides a brief description of their chemical syntheses along with their mode of action and clinical trial results available in Google and different peer reviewed journals till 24th October 2020.

scholarly journals Clinical Trial Regulations In India : Past, Present and Future

JMS SKIMS ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-17
Author(s):  
Haroon Rashid
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Disease Burden ◽  
International Standards ◽  
New Drugs ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Long Time ◽  
Regulatory Bodies ◽  
Guidance Documents ◽  
Human Use

Clinical trials are the only way of establishing the safety and efficacy of any new drug before its introduction in the market for human use. Clinical trials (with safeguards) are necessary for introduction of new drugs for a country like India, considering its disease burden and emergence of new variants of disease.The regulatory bodies need to frame guidelines and regulatory approval processes on a par with international standards. Many of the new laws, guidance documents, notifications and initiatives for regulating pharmaceutical industry were in the charts for quite a long time. Indian regulatory authorities have started looking into speedy implementation and providing support in terms ofnecessary infrastructure and investment. JMS 2017; 20(1):5-17

scholarly journals Safety and Efficacy of Anti-Bcma CAR-T Cells for Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: A Systematic Review of Literature

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 5-6
Author(s):  
Israr Khan ◽  
Abdul Rafae ◽  
Anum Javaid ◽  
Zahoor Ahmed ◽  
Haifza Abeera Qadeer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
T Cells ◽  
Partial Response ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Car T Cells ◽  
Car T

Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) is a plasma cell disorder and demonstrates overexpression of B cell maturation antigen (BCMA). Our objective is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR-T) against BCMA in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Methods: We conducted a systematic literature search using PubMed, Cochrane, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Embase databases. We also searched for data from society meetings. A total of 935 articles were identified, and 610 were screened for relevance. Results: Data from thirty-one original studies with a total of 871 patients (pts) were included based on defined eligibility criteria, see Table 1. Hu et al. reported an overall response rate (ORR) of 100% in 33 pts treated with BCMA CAR-T cells including 21 complete response (CR), 7 very good partial response (VGPR), 4 partial response (PR). Moreover, 32 pts achieved minimal residual disease (MRD) negative status. Chen et al. reported ORR of 88%, 14% CR, 6% VGPR, and 82% MRD negative status with BCMA CAR-T therapy in 17 RRMM pts. In another clinical trial by Han et al. BCMA CAR-T therapy demonstrated an ORR of 100% among 7 evaluable pts with 43% pts having ≥ CR and 14% VGPR. An ORR of 100% with 64% stringent CR (sCR) and 36% VGPR was reported with novel anti-BCMA CART cells (CT103A). Similarly, Li et al. reported ORR of 87.5%, sCR of 50%, VGPR 12.5%, and PR 25% in 16 pts. BCMA targeting agent, JNJ-4528, showed ORR of 91%, including 4sCR, 2CR, 10MRD, and 7VGPR. CAR-T- bb2121 demonstrated ORR of 85%, sCR 36%, CR 9%, VGPR 57%, and MRD negativity of 100% (among 16 responsive pts). GSK2857916, a BCMA targeting CAR-T cells yielded ORR of 60% in both clinical trials. Three studies utilizing bispecific CART cells targeting both BCMA & CD38 (LCARB38M) reported by Zhao et al., Wang et al., and Fan et al. showed ORR of 88%, 88%, & 100% respectively. Topp et al. reported ORR of 31% along with 5 ≥CR and 5 MRD negative status in 42 pts treated with Bi T-cells Engager BiTE® Ab BCMA targeting antigen (AMG420). One clinical trial presented AUTO2 CART cells therapy against BCMA with an ORR of 43%, VGPR of 14%, and PR of 28%. CT053CAR-BCMA showed 14sCR and 5CR with a collective ORR of 87.5% and MRD negative status of 85% in 24 and 20 evaluable pts, respectively. Likewise, Mikkilineni et al. reported an ORR of 83%, sCR of 16.7%, and VGPR & PR of 25% and 41% in 12 pts treated with FHVH-BCMA T cells. Similar results are also reported in other clinical trials of BCMA targeting CART therapy (Table 1). The most common adverse effects exhibited were grade 1-3 hematologic (cytopenia) and cytokine release syndrome (CRS) (mostly reversible with tocilizumab). Conclusion: Initial data from ongoing clinical trials using BCMA targeting CAR-T therapy have yielded promising results both in terms of improved outcome and tolerable toxicity profiles. Although two phase 3 trails are ongoing, additional data is warranted to further ensure the safety and efficacy of anti-BCMA CAR-T cells therapy in pts with RRMM for future use. Disclosures Anwer: Incyte, Seattle Genetics, Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie Pharma, Astellas Pharma, Celegene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals.: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

scholarly journals Safety and Effectiveness of Favipiravir for Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19): A Rapid Review of Available Evidence

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammadreza Mobinizadeh ◽  
Morteza Arab-Zozani
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Therapeutic Potential ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Rapid Review ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Clinical Trial Registration ◽  
Registration System ◽  
Novel Coronavirus ◽  
First Time

Context: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) appeared for the first time in December 2019 in Wuhan, China. Due to the lack of unified and integrated evidence for Favipiravir, this study was conducted to rapidly review the existing evidence to help evidence-based decision-making on the therapeutic potential of this drug in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. Evidence Acquisition: This study is a rapid Health Technology Assessment (HTA). By searching pertinent databases, the research team collected relevant articles and tried to create a policy guide through a thematic approach. This rapid review was done in four steps: (1) Searching for evidence through databases; (2) screening the evidence considering eligibility criteria; (3) data extraction; and (4) analyzing the data through thematic analysis. Results: After applying the inclusion criteria, four studies were finally found, including three review studies and a clinical trial that was temporarily removed by its publisher from the journal’s website. After searching the sources mentioned in the articles, two ongoing clinical trials were found in China. Also, by searching the clinical trial website, www.clinicaltrials.gov, five clinical trials were found in the search. The result of the search in the clinical trial registration system in Iran showed a study that is in the process of patient recruitment. A limited number of other articles were found, mostly in the form of reflections from physicians or researchers and letters to editors who have predicted the drug’s performance on SARS-CoV-2, which needs further clinical study to be approved. Conclusions: With the available evidence, it is not possible to make a definite conclusion about the safety and efficacy of Favipiravir in the treatment of patients with COVID-19.

Safety and efficacy outcomes with nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma and low Karnofsky performance status: Results from the CheckMate 920 trial.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 315-315
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Hutson ◽  
Bradley Curtis Carthon ◽  
Jeffrey Yorio ◽  
Sunil Babu ◽  
Heidi Ann McKean ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Clear Cell ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Grade 3

315 Background: Combination therapy with nivolumab + ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) has demonstrated long-term efficacy and tolerability for patients (pts) with previously untreated advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). Most pivotal clinical trials in pts with aRCC have excluded pts with low Karnofsky performance status (KPS; < 70%). CheckMate 920 is a multi-arm, phase IIIb/IV, open-label clinical trial of NIVO+IPI treatment in pts enrolled in a community practice setting with aRCC and a high unmet medical need. We present safety and efficacy results for the cohort of pts with aRCC of any histology and KPS 50%–60% from CheckMate 920 (NCT02982954). Methods: Pts with previously untreated advanced/metastatic RCC and KPS 50%–60% received NIVO 3 mg/kg + IPI 1 mg/kg Q3W × 4 doses followed by 480 mg NIVO Q4W for ≤ 2 years or until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was incidence of grade ≥ 3 immune-mediated adverse events (imAEs) within 100 days of last dose of study drug. Key secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST v1.1 (both per investigator). Exploratory endpoints included overall survival (OS). Results: Of 25 treated pts with KPS 50%–60%, 76% were men; median age was 67 years (range, 34–81). IMDC risk was favorable in 0%, intermediate in 32%, and poor in 68% of pts; 84% had clear cell and 16% had non-clear cell RCC histology. With a minimum follow-up of 25 months, median duration of therapy (95% CI) was 2.3 months (2.1–7.7) for NIVO and 2.1 months (2.1–2.1) for IPI. The median number of doses (range) received was 4 (1–27) for NIVO and 4 (1–4) for IPI; 76% of pts received ≥ 4 NIVO doses and 68% received all 4 IPI doses. The only grade 3–4 imAEs by category were hepatitis (4.0%) and adrenal insufficiency (4.0%). No grade 5 imAEs occurred. Overall, 4 (16%) pts discontinued due to any-grade adverse events (n = 1 each for elevated AST, malignant neoplasm progression, back pain, and acetabulum fracture). Of 18 evaluable pts, ORR was 33.3% (95% CI, 13.3–59.0); no pts had a complete response and 6 had partial response. Median time to objective response was 4.5 months (range, 2.5–24.7). Median duration of objective response was 20.6 months (range, 0.03+–24.2+). Median PFS was 4.6 months (95% CI, 2.5–14.8). Median OS was 15.6 months (95% CI, 5.3–25.1). Conclusions: NIVO+IPI demonstrated an acceptable safety profile and promising antitumor activity in pts with previously untreated aRCC and KPS 50%–60%. The combination was tolerated at a dose intensity similar to that observed in clinical trials conducted in pts with higher KPS (≥ 70%). These data support the value of NIVO+IPI in pts who may not be considered ideal candidates for this therapy and consequently may have limited treatment options. Clinical trial information: NCT02982954 .

Clinical Trial Design and Statistics

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie Ann Sosa
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Data Analysis ◽  
Trial Design ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Drug Application ◽  
Clinical Trial Design ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Type I ◽  
End Points

A clinical trial is a planned experiment designed to prospectively measure the efficacy or effectiveness of an intervention by comparing outcomes in a group of subjects treated with the test intervention with those observed in one or more comparable group(s) of subjects receiving another intervention.  Historically, the gold standard for a clinical trial has been a prospective, randomized, double-blind study, but it is sometimes impractical or unethical to conduct such in clinical medicine and surgery. Conventional outcomes have traditionally been clinical end points; with the rise of new technologies, however, they are increasingly being supplemented and/or replaced by surrogate end points, such as serum biomarkers. Because patients are involved, safety considerations and ethical principles must be incorporated into all phases of clinical trial design, conduct, data analysis, and presentation. This review covers the history of clinical trials, clinical trial phases, ethical issues, implementing the study, basic biostatistics for data analysis, and other resources. Figures show drug development and clinical trial process, and type I and II error. Tables list Food and Drug Administration new drug application types, and types of missing data in clinical trials. This review contains 2 highly rendered figures, 2 tables, and 38 references

scholarly journals Novel Insights From Human Studies on the Role of High-Density Lipoprotein in Mortality and Noncardiovascular Disease

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian M. Madsen ◽  
Anette Varbo ◽  
Børge G. Nordestgaard
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
High Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Therapeutic Potential ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Hdl Cholesterol ◽  
High Density ◽  
Cancer Type ◽  
Health And Disease ◽  
And Function

The vast majority of research about HDL (high-density lipoprotein) has for decades revolved around the possible role of HDL in atherosclerosis and its therapeutic potential within cardiovascular disease prevention; however, failures with therapies aimed at increasing HDL cholesterol has left questions as to what the role and function of HDL in human health and disease is. Recent observational studies have further shown that extreme high HDL cholesterol is associated with high mortality leading to speculations that HDL could in some instances be harmful. In addition, evidence from observational, and to a lesser extent genetic, studies has emerged indicating that HDL might be associated with the development of other major noncardiovascular diseases, such as infectious disease, autoimmune disease, cancer, type 2 diabetes, kidney disease, and lung disease. In this review, we discuss (1) the association between extreme high HDL cholesterol and mortality and (2) the emerging human evidence linking HDL to several major diseases outside the realm of cardiovascular disease.

scholarly journals A Model of a Zebrafish Avatar for Co-Clinical Trials

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 677 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice Usai ◽  
Gregorio Di Franco ◽  
Patrizia Colucci ◽  
Luca Emanuele Pollina ◽  
Enrico Vasile ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Drug Efficacy ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Zebrafish Embryos ◽  
General Criterion ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Animal Trial ◽  
Chemotherapy Dose ◽  
Efficacy Studies

Animal “avatars” and co-clinical trials are being developed for possible use in personalized medicine in oncology. In a co-clinical trial, the cancer cells of the patient’s tumor are xenotransplanted into the animal avatar for drug efficacy studies, and the data collected in the animal trial are used to plan the best drug treatment in the patient trial. Zebrafish have recently been proposed for implementing avatar models, however the lack of a general criterion for the chemotherapy dose conversion from humans to fish is a limitation in terms of conducting co-clinical trials. Here, we validate a simple, reliant and cost-effective avatar model based on the use of zebrafish embryos. By crossing data from safety and efficacy studies, we found a basic formula for estimating the equivalent dose for use in co-clinical trials which we validated in a clinical study enrolling 24 adult patients with solid cancers (XenoZ, NCT03668418).

scholarly journals The Role of Animal Models in Evaluating Reasonable Safety and Efficacy for Human Trials of Cell-Based Interventions for Neurologic Conditions

2008 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Regenberg ◽  
Debra JH Mathews ◽  
David M Blass ◽  
Hilary Bok ◽  
Joseph T Coyle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Animal Models ◽  
Regenerative Medicine ◽  
Therapeutic Agents ◽  
Preclinical Studies ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Proper Role ◽  
New Treatments ◽  
Gathering Data

Progress in regenerative medicine seems likely to produce new treatments for neurologic conditions that use human cells as therapeutic agents; at least one trial for such an intervention is already under way. The development of cell-based interventions for neurologic conditions (CBI-NCs) will likely include preclinical studies using animals as models for humans with conditions of interest. This paper explores predictive validity challenges and the proper role for animal models in developing CBI-NCs. In spite of limitations, animal models are and will remain an essential tool for gathering data in advance of first-in-human clinical trials. The goal of this paper is to provide a realistic lens for viewing the role of animal models in the context of CBI-NCs and to provide recommendations for moving forward through this challenging terrain.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document