scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of Infliximab for steroid‑resistant immune‑related adverse events: A retrospective study

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yukio Kadokawa ◽  
Mari Takagi ◽  
Tomoe Yoshida ◽  
Akitoshi Tatsumi ◽  
Keiko Fujita ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Steroid Resistant

Tocilizumab in Giant Cell Arteritis: A Multicenter Retrospective Study of 34 Patients

2016 ◽  
Vol 43 (8) ◽  
pp. 1547-1552 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexis Régent ◽  
Serge Redeker ◽  
Alban Deroux ◽  
Pierre Kieffer ◽  
Kim Heang Ly ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Giant Cell Arteritis ◽  
Giant Cell ◽  
Multicenter Study ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Severe Adverse Events ◽  
Retrospective Multicenter Study

Objective.To report the efficacy and safety of tocilizumab (TCZ) for giant cell arteritis (GCA).Methods.A retrospective multicenter study that included 34 patients receiving TCZ for GCA.Results.TCZ was effective in all but 6 patients, who still had mild symptoms. Mean glucocorticoid dose was tapered. One patient died and 3 patients had to stop TCZ therapy because of severe adverse events. Twenty-three patients stopped treatment; 8 of these experienced relapses after a mean of 3.5 ± 1.3 months.Conclusion.TCZ is effective in GCA. However, side effects occur. Whether this treatment has only a suspensive effect remains to be determined.

scholarly journals Retrospective Analysis of Efficacy and Safety of Tocilizumab Treatment in Patients with Severe Systemic-Onset Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis Followed for 12 Months

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
E. I. Alexeeva ◽  
A. A. Baranov ◽  
R. V. Denisova ◽  
S. I. Valieva ◽  
T. M. Bzarova ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis ◽  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Immunosuppressive Therapy ◽  
Retrospective Analysis ◽  
Inactive Disease ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Systemic Onset

The results of the retrospective study evaluating efficacy and safety of tocilizumab treatment in 75 patients with severe systemic-onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis refractory to standard immunosuppressive therapy are presented in the paper. Inactive disease was documented in 64% of patients after 6 months of treatment and in 73% of patients after 12 months. Adverse events manifested as mild and moderate infections as well as laboratory abnormalities: leukopenia, neutropenia, and elevated aminotransferase levels.

scholarly journals Efficacy of tocilizumab for refractory Takayasu arteritis: a retrospective study and literature review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haiyan Li ◽  
Zongwen Shuai
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Effect ◽  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Takayasu Arteritis ◽  
Common Adverse Effect ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Significant Drop ◽  
Medical University

AbstractTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of tocilizumab (TCZ) in the treatment of refractory Takayasu arteritis (TAK). Eleven refractory TAK patients treated with TCZ at the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University between 2017 July and 2020 December were respectively analyzed. We also respectively analyzed the studies on TCZ efficacy in patients with TAK, from PubMed/MEDLINE, Elsevier Science Direct between January 2010 and April 2021. The median age of 11 patients was 34(19–46) years. After 3 months of TCZ, a significant drop was found in median NIH (3[2–5] at baseline vs 1[0–2] after 6 months; p < 0.05), ITAS-2010 score (8.5[6–11] vs 6[1–10]; p < 0.05). One (9%) patient experienced relapse during TCZ treatment. After withdrawal of TCZ, one patient (9%) underwent relapse and nine patients (81%) were spared of GC use. In literature review, a total of 211 patients (mean age 35 years) were analyzed, including 80 (38%) Chinese and 169 females (80%). Among the 211 patients, (154 patients) 73% achieved remission after the last infusion of TCZ; TAK relapsed in 6% of patients during TCZ treatment and 5% of the TCZ patients after the withdrawal of TCZ. A total of 95 types of adverse events were observed in the literature. Infection was the most common adverse effect, occurring in 50% of patients. TCZ could serve as an efficacious and safe agent for refractory TAK.

scholarly journals Everolimus Versus Sirolimus for Angiomyolipoma Associated with Tuberous Sclerosis Complex: A Multi-Institutional Retrospective Study in China

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
luo cong ◽  
Yu-shi Zhang ◽  
Ming-Xin Zhang ◽  
Min-Feng Chen ◽  
Yuan Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Tuberous Sclerosis ◽  
Oral Mucositis ◽  
Tuberous Sclerosis Complex ◽  
National Cancer Institute ◽  
Therapeutic Efficacy ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
First Choice ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Purpose To evaluate the efficacy and safety of everolimus and sirolimus in patients with tuberous sclerosis complex-associated angiomyolipomas (TSC-AML). Materials and Methods We performed a multi-institutional retrospective study of TSC-AML patients treated with oral everolimus or sirolimus. Angiomyolipoma volume was estimated using orthogonal measurements by MRI or CT. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. All analyses were performed using SPSS 19.0 software. Results There were high response rates in both two groups. With the prolonged medication time, the therapeutic efficacy of two agents became more significant. Everolimus had a more significant TSC-AML volume reduction after 6 and 12 months than sirolimus. More than 1/2 of everolimus patients had ≥ 50% reduction and approximately 80% of them had ≥ 30% reduction, higher than that of the sirolimus patients. Regarding safety, there was no significant difference in the incidence of AEs between the two groups. And the most common AE was oral mucositis. Conclusions Both everolimus and sirolimus are excellent therapeutic choices for TSC-AML. However, everolimus had a better therapeutic efficacy than sirolimus, especially in reducing TSC-AML volume. Therefore, everolimus is recommended as the first choice.

A retrospective study on the efficacy and safety of sorafenib or lenvatinib combined with sintilimab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16127-e16127
Author(s):  
Zhen Zeng ◽  
Linzhi Zhang ◽  
Tong Wu ◽  
Jiamin Cheng ◽  
Yan Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Grade 3

e16127 Background: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of sorafenib or lenvatinib combined with sintilimab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Methods: This retrospective study included patients with advanced/metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma who received sintilimab (iv. 200 mg, Q3W) combined with sorafenib (oral, 400 mg twice-daily) (cohort A) or lenvatinib (oral, 12 mg/day for bodyweight≥60 kg or 8 mg/day for bodyweight < 60 kg) (cohort B) as first line therapy between March 2019 to December 2020 in the 5th medical center of the PLA general hospital of China. The primary endpoint was Progression-Free Survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoints included the Objective Response Rate (ORR), Disease Control Rate (DCR), Overall Survival (OS), Time to Progression (TTP) and safety. Results: 45 patients were enrolled, of which 29 were in the cohort A and 16 were in the cohort B. Except for the extrahepatic metastasis (62.1% vs 25.0%, P= 0.029), there were no significant differences in age, gender, weight, ECOG performance status, Child-Pugh, BCLC staging, and the proportion of previous treatment regimens between the two cohorts. The mean (±SD) exposure cycles in the two cohorts were 7.2±6.7 vs 7.1±4.7 ( P= 0.584). The median PFS of cohort A (8.2 months, 95%CI 3.1-19.5) was longer than that of cohort B (5.2 months, 95%CI 2.0-10.8), but there was no significant difference (HR 0.55, 95%CI 0.24-1.29, P = 0.161). However, there was no significant difference between the two cohorts in ORR (24.1% vs 6.3%, P= 0.226), DCR (82.8% vs 75.0%, P= 0.700) and median TTF (8.2 vs 4.6months, HR 0.49, 95%CI 0.21- 1.10, P= 0.074). OS data were not yet mature. There was no significant difference in the incidence of all grades and grade 3-4 adverse events between the two cohorts. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events in the two cohorts were hand-foot syndrome (17.2%, 5/29) and lung infection (12.5%, 2/16). There was 1 patient (immune hepatitis) in cohort A and 2 patients (pulmonary infection) in cohort B leading to treatment interruption due to adverse events, and no deaths due to treatment. Conclusions: Sorafenib or lenvatinib combined with sintilimab showed a good efficacy and safety in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, the safety and tolerability profiles were consistent with those previously observed. Sorafenib plus sintilimab provided an improved PFS versus lenvatinib, which requires a large sample of randomized controlled trial to confirm.[Table: see text]

scholarly journals Everolimus versus sirolimus for angiomyolipoma associated with tuberous sclerosis complex: a multi-institutional retrospective study in China

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cong Luo ◽  
Yu-Shi Zhang ◽  
Ming-Xin Zhang ◽  
Min-Feng Chen ◽  
Yuan Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Tuberous Sclerosis ◽  
Tuberous Sclerosis Complex ◽  
National Cancer Institute ◽  
Therapeutic Efficacy ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
First Choice ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Choice Of Therapy

Abstract Purpose To evaluate the efficacy and safety of everolimus and sirolimus in patients with tuberous sclerosis complex-associated angiomyolipomas (TSC-AML). Materials and methods We performed a multi-institutional retrospective study of TSC-AML patients treated with oral everolimus 10 mg or sirolimus 2 mg per day for at least 3 months. Angiomyolipoma volume was estimated using orthogonal measurements by MRI or CT. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. All analyses were performed using SPSS 19.0 software. Results Response rates were high in both groups. With the prolonged medication durations, the therapeutic efficacy of both agents became more significant. The TSC-AML volume reduction after 6 and 12 months was more pronounced in patients with everolimus than those with sirolimus. More than half of the patients treated with everolimus had ≥ 50% reduction, and approximately 80% of them had ≥ 30% reduction, which was higher than that in patients treated with sirolimus. Regarding safety, there was no significant difference in the incidence of AEs between the two groups. Conclusions Both everolimus and sirolimus are excellent therapeutic options for TSC-AML. However, everolimus has a better therapeutic efficacy than sirolimus, particularly in reducing TSC-AML volume. Everolimus is therefore recommended as the first choice of therapy for TSC-AML.

Efficacy and Safety of Antigen-specific Immunotherapy in the Treatment of Patients with Non-small-cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 199-209 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bing-Di Yan ◽  
Xiao-Feng Cong ◽  
Sha-Sha Zhao ◽  
Meng Ren ◽  
Zi-Ling Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Specific Immunotherapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Small Cell Lung

Background and Objective: We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of antigen-specific immunotherapy (Belagenpumatucel-L, MAGE-A3, L-BLP25, and TG4010) in the treatment of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). </P><P> Methods: A comprehensive literature search on PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science was conducted. Eligible studies were clinical trials of patients with NSCLC who received the antigenspecific immunotherapy. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) were calculated for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS). Pooled risk ratios (RRs) were calculated for overall response rate (ORR) and the incidence of adverse events. </P><P> Results: In total, six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 4,806 patients were included. Pooled results showed that, antigen-specific immunotherapy did not significantly prolong OS (HR=0.92, 95%CI: 0.83, 1.01; P=0.087) and PFS (HR=0.93, 95%CI: 0.85, 1.01; P=0.088), but improved ORR (RR=1.72, 95%CI: 1.11, 2.68; P=0.016). Subgroup analysis based on treatment agents showed that, tecemotide was associated with a significant improvement in OS (HR=0.85, 95%CI: 0.74, 0.99; P=0.03) and PFS (HR=0.70, 95%CI: 0.49, 0.99, P=0.044); TG4010 was associated with an improvement in PFS (HR=0.87, 95%CI: 0.75, 1.00, P=0.058). In addition, NSCLC patients who were treated with antigen-specific immunotherapy exhibited a significantly higher incidence of adverse events than those treated with other treatments (RR=1.11, 95%CI: 1.00, 1.24; P=0.046). </P><P> Conclusion: Our study demonstrated the clinical survival benefits of tecemotide and TG4010 in the treatment of NSCLC. However, these evidence might be limited by potential biases. Therefore, further well-conducted, large-scale RCTs are needed to verify our findings.

Crizotinib Versus Chemotherapy on ALK-positive NSCLC: A Systematic Review of Efficacy and Safety

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mingxia Wang ◽  
Guanqi Wang ◽  
Haiyan Ma ◽  
Baoen Shan
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Retrospective Studies ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Treated Group ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Alk Positive

Introduction: Crizotinib was approved to treat anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)- positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) by the Food and Drug Administration in 2011.We conducted a systematic review of clinical trials and retrospective studies to compare the efficacy and safety of crizotinib with chemotherapy. </P><P> Methods: We searched electronic databases from inception to Dec. 2016. Clinical trials and retrospective studies regarding crizotinib and crizotinib versus chemotherapy in treatment of NSCLC were eligible. The primary outcomes were the objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR). Results: Nine studies (five clinical trials and four retrospective studies) including 729 patients met the inclusion criteria. Crizotinib treatment revealed 1-year OS of 77.1% and PFS of 9.17 months. And crizotinib had a better performance than chemotherapy in ORR (OR: 4.97, 95%CI: 3.16 to 7.83, P<0.00001, I2=35%). DCR revealed superiority with crizotinib than chemotherapy (OR: 3.42, 95% CI: 2.33 to 5.01, P<0.00001, I2=0%). PR (partial response) were significant superior to that of chemotherapy through direct systematic review. No statistically significant difference in CR (complete response) was found between crizotinib-treated group and chemotherapy-treated group. Regarding SD (stable disease), chemotherapy-treated group had a better performance than crizotinib-treated group. Common adverse events associated with crizotinib were visual disorder, gastrointestinal side effects, and elevated liver aminotransferase levels, whereas common adverse events with chemotherapy were fatigue, nausea, and hematologic toxicity. This systematic review revealed improved objective response rate and increased disease control rate in crizotinib group comparing with chemotherapy group. Crizotinib treatment would be a favorable treatment option for patients with ALK-positive NSCLC. ALK inhibitors may have future potential applications in other cancers driven by ALK or c-MET gene mutations.

A multicenter prospective hospital-based cohort study on the efficacy and safety of pitavastatin.

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdullah Shehab ◽  
Asim Ahmed Elnour ◽  
Akshaya Srikanth Bhagavathula ◽  
Joseph Pulavelil Kurian ◽  
Gazi Hassan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
United Arab Emirates ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Low Density ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Onset Diabetes ◽  
The Mean ◽  
New Onset

Aims: We aim to investigate the efficacy and safety of pitavastatin 4 mg in a population of people living in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Background: Pitavastatin is a member of the HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors family which was approved for use in adult subjects with primary hyperlipidemia or mixed dyslipidemia. To date, no published studies have assessed the efficacy and safety of pitavastatin in the United Arab Emirates. Objective: The main objective of the current study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of pitavastatin in subjects with dyslipidemia for primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases based on total cardiovascular risk. Methods: This was a multicentre (four private hospitals) prospective cohort study to analyze data on the use of pitavastatin for dyslipidemia in adult outpatients in Abu Dhabi and Dubai emirates, United Arab Emirates. We have followed-up the clinical profiles of subjects in four hospitals for six-weeks during the period from June 2015 to June 2017. Efficacy was based on the evaluation of the mean (± standard deviation) change in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol between baseline and week six after the initiation of pitavastatin therapy. Safety was reported as the incidence of adverse events occurred with the use of pitavastatin and the development of new-onset diabetes. Results: A total of 400 subjects who were receiving pitavastatin 4 mg were included. The mean age of subjects was 50.7 ±10.8 years, of these 79.0% were males. At the baseline, the mean level of total cholesterol was 185.4 ±41.5 mg/dL, low density lipoprotein was 154.9 ±48.55 mg/dL, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol was 40.5 ±11.23 mg/dL and fasting blood glucose was 115.0 (±16.63) mg/dl. At the end of six weeks, low density lipoprotein levels significantly decreased to 112.09 ±41.90 mg/dl (standard mean difference [SMD] (-42.8%), 95% CI: -42.88 [-49.17 to -36.58] mg/dl, P <0.001), while high density lipoprotein levels improved (SMD, 95% CI: 1.77% [0.25 to 3.28] mg/dl, P <0.022). There were 55 subjects (13.7%) reported various adverse events such as myalgia (7.5%), sleep disorders (2.5%), and myopathy (2.2%). Furthermore, 4 (1.0%) have had developed new-onset diabetes post six-weeks of initiation of pitavastatin therapy. Conclusion: Pitavastatin 4 mg had howed robust efficacy in reducing LDL-C levels and improving HDL-C levels in subjects with dyslipidemias. The use of pitavastatin was associated with a low discontinuation rate, fewer adverse events, and very limited cases of new-onset diabetes.

Efficacy and Safety of Non-Steroidal Anti-Androgens in Patients with Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammed Rashid ◽  
Madhan Ramesh ◽  
K. Shamshavali ◽  
Amit Dang ◽  
Himanshu Patel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Quality Assessment ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference

Background: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the sixth primary cause of cancer death. However, conflicts are present about the efficacy and safety of Non-steroidal anti-androgens (NSAA) for its treatment. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of NSAAs versus any comparator for the treatment of advanced or metastatic PCa (mPCa). Methodology: MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library were searched. References of included studies and clinicaltrials.gov were also searched for relevant studies. Only English language studies after 1990 were considered for review. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the efficacy and safety of NSAAs as compared with any other comparator including surgery or chemotherapy in mPCa patients were included. The outcomes include efficacy, safety and the tolerability of the treatment. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used for quality assessment. Two authors were independently involved in the selection, extraction and quality assessment of included studies and disagreements were resolved by discussion or by consulting a third reviewer. Results: Fifty-eight out of 1307 non-duplicate RCTs with 29154 patients were considered for the review. NSAA showed significantly better progression-free survival [PFS] (Hazard ratio [HR], 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46-0.78; P=0.0001), time to distant metastasis or death [TTD] (HR, 0.80; 95% CI 0.73-0.91; p<0.0001), objective response (Odds ratio [OR], 1.64; 95% CI 1.06-2.54; P=0.03) and clinical benefits (OR, 1.33; 95% CI 1.08-1.63; P=0.006) as compared to the control group. There was no significant difference observed between the groups in terms of overall survival (HR, 0.95; 95%CI, 0.87-1.03; P=0.18) and time to progression (HR, 0.93; 95% CI 0.77-1.11; P=0.43). Treatment-related adverse events were more with the NSAA group, but the discontinuation due to lack of efficacy reason was 43% significantly lesser than the control group in patients with mPCa. Rest of the outcomes were appeared to be non-significant. Conclusion: Treatment with NSAA was appeared to be better efficacious with respect to PFS, TTD, and response rate with considerable adverse events when compared to the control group in patients with metastatic PCa.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document