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

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.

Study Designs for Evaluation of Combination Treatment: Focus On Individual Patient Benefit

Combination treatment, i.e., the use of two or more drugs for the same condition, is frequent in medicine if monotherapy yields an insufficient therapeutic response. We here review and challenge clinical study designs and formats of reporting outcomes for the evaluation of the benefit/risk ratio of combination treatment over monotherapy. We demonstrate that benefits of combination treatment at the group level over-estimate the probability of benefit at the single patient level based on outcome simulations under almost any imaginable setting. Based on these findings we propose that studies testing combination treatment should always report on percentages of responders to monotherapy and combination treatment. We provide equations that allow calculation of the percentage of patients truly benefitting from combination (responders to both monotherapies) and that of patients exposed to risk of harm from adverse effects without a reasonable expectation of individual benefit. These considerations are explained based on real clinical data, mostly from the field of functional urology (male lower urinary tract symptoms).

Real-World Evidence for the Safety and Efficacy of CGRP Monoclonal Antibody Therapy Added to OnabotulinumtoxinA Treatment for Migraine Prevention in Adult Patients With Chronic Migraine

Background: OnabotulinumtoxinA and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) target different migraine pathways, therefore, combination treatment may provide additional effectiveness for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine (CM) than either treatment alone. The objective of this study was to collect real-world data to improve the understanding of the safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of adding a CGRP mAb to onabotulinumtoxinA treatment for the preventive treatment of CM.Methods: This was a retrospective, longitudinal study conducted using data extracted from a single clinical site's electronic medical records (EMR) of adult patients (≥18 years) with CM treated with ≥2 consecutive cycles of onabotulinumtoxinA before ≥1 month of continuous onabotulinumtoxinA and CGRP mAb (erenumab, fremanezumab, or galcanezumab) combination treatment. Safety was evaluated by the rate of adverse events (AE) and serious adverse events (SAE). The proportion of patients who discontinued either onabotulinumtoxinA, a CGRP mAb, or combination treatment, and the reason for discontinuation, if available, was collected. The effectiveness of combination preventive treatment was assessed by the reduction in monthly headache days (MHD). Outcome data were extracted from EMR at the first CGRP mAb prescription (index) and up to four assessments at ~3, 6, 9, and 12 months post-index. The final analyses were based on measures consistently reported in the EMR.Results: EMR were collected for 192 patients, of which 148 met eligibility criteria and were included for analysis. Erenumab was prescribed to 56.7% of patients, fremanezumab to 42.6%, and galcanezumab to 0.7%. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) MHD were 20.4 (6.6) prior to onabotulinumtoxinA treatment and 14.0 (6.9) prior to the addition of a CGRP mAb (baseline). After real-world addition of a CGRP mAb, there were significant reductions in MHD at the first assessment (~3 months) (mean −2.6 days/month, 95% CI −3.7, −1.4) and at all subsequent visits. After ~12 months of continuous combination treatment, MHD were reduced by 4.6 days/month (95% CI −6.7, −2.5) and 34.9% of patients achieved ≥50% MHD reduction from index. AEs were reported by 18 patients (12.2%), with the most common being constipation (n = 8, 5.4% [onabotulinumtoxinA plus erenumab only]) and injection site reactions (n = 5, 3.4%). No SAEs were reported. Overall, 90 patients (60.8%) discontinued one or both treatments. The most common reason for discontinuing either treatment was lack of insurance coverage (40%); few (~14%) patients discontinued a CGRP mAb and none discontinued onabotulinumtoxinA due to safety/tolerability.Conclusion: In this real-world study, onabotulinumtoxinA was effective at reducing MHD and the addition of a CGRP mAb was safe, well-tolerated and associated with incremental and clinically meaningful reductions in MHD for those who stayed on the combination treatment. No new safety signals were identified. Of those who discontinued, the majority reported lack of insurance coverage as a reason. Prospective real-world and controlled trials are needed to further evaluate the safety and potential benefits of this combination treatment paradigm for people with CM.

The Beneficial Effects of Combining Anti-Aβ Antibody NP106 and Curcumin Analog TML-6 on the Treatment of Alzheimer’s Disease in APP/PS1 Mice

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disease with a multifactorial etiology. A multitarget treatment that modulates multifaceted biological functions might be more effective than a single-target approach. Here, the therapeutic efficacy of combination treatment using anti-Aβ antibody NP106 and curcumin analog TML-6 versus monotherapy was investigated in an APP/PS1 mouse model of AD. Our data demonstrate that both combination treatment and monotherapy attenuated brain Aβ and improved the nesting behavioral deficit to varying degrees. Importantly, the combination treatment group had the lowest Aβ levels, and insoluble forms of Aβ were reduced most effectively. The nesting performance of APP/PS1 mice receiving combination treatment was better than that of other APP/PS1 groups. Further findings indicate that enhanced microglial Aβ phagocytosis and lower levels of proinflammatory cytokines were concurrent with the aforementioned effects of NP106 in combination with TML-6. Intriguingly, combination treatment also normalized the gut microbiota of APP/PS1 mice to levels resembling the wild-type control. Taken together, combination treatment outperformed NP106 or TML-6 monotherapy in ameliorating Aβ pathology and the nesting behavioral deficit in APP/PS1 mice. The superior effect might result from a more potent modulation of microglial function, cerebral inflammation, and the gut microbiota. This innovative treatment paradigm confers a new avenue to develop more efficacious AD treatments.

Pulse dye laser therapy and superficial cryotherapy as a novel combination treatment for hypertrophic scars and keloids

Background: Hypertrophic scars are benign and fibrotic skin lesions caused by defects in the regulation of cellularity during the wound-healingprocess, in which there is higher collagen production and less degradation. Genetic predisposing factors and different skin injuries may play a role in developing these types of lesions. On the other hand, keloids are overgrowths of fibrous tissue outside the original boundaries of trauma, yet these may also occur spontaneously. There are numerous treatment options for both conditions, including silicone gel sheeting, pressure therapy, intralesional triamcinolone acetonide, radiation, laser therapy, cryosurgery, interferon, 5-fluorouracil, and surgical excision as well as a multitude of extracts and topical agents. Objective: The objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of pulse dye laser (PDL) therapy and superficial cryotherapy as a combination treatment for hypertrophic scars and keloids. Method: Four Arabic female patients were seen at the outpatient clinic of the Department of Dermatology at the King Fahd Hospital of the University in Khobar, Saudi Arabia. The patients had keloids and hypertrophic scars. Treatment with cryotherapy every week for three weeks followed by one session of pulsed dye laser was administered rotationally for three to six months until the lesions displayed remarkable physical improvement or complete resolution. Results: All patients experienced significant improvement, showing a reduction in the size, erythema, pliability, and pruritus. None of the hypertrophic scars or keloids deteriorated during the one year of treatment. No complications were noted during the treatment period. Conclusion: Sequential PDL therapy combined with superficial cryotherapy may be an option for treating hypertrophic scars and keloids.

Spatial Distribution and Predictive Significance of Dendritic Cells and Macrophages in Esophageal Cancer Treated With Combined Chemoradiotherapy and PD-1 Blockade

BackgroundThe first clinical study (NCT03671265) of first-line chemoradiotherapy combined with PD-1 blockade showed promising treatment outcomes in locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). However, partial patients did not respond to the combination treatment. The roles of dendritic cells (DCs) and macrophages in this combination treatment remain poorly understood.MethodsWe performed multiplexed immunofluorescence method to identify CD11c+ DCs, CD68+ macrophages, and their PD-L1- or PD-L1+ subpopulations in paired tumor biopsies (n = 36) collected at baseline and during the combination treatment (after radiation, 40 Gy) from the phase Ib trial (NCT03671265). We applied whole exome sequencing in the baseline tumor biopsies (n = 14) to estimate tumor mutation burden (TMB). We dynamically investigated the spatial distribution of DCs and macrophages under chemoradiotherapy combined with PD-1 blockade, and evaluated the association between their spatial distribution and combination outcome, and TMB.ResultsThe results showed that high percentages of PD-L1- DCs and macrophages in the baseline tumor compartment, but not in the stromal compartment, predicted improved OS and PFS. Chemoradiotherapy combined with PD-1 blockade promoted DCs and macrophages to migrate closer to tumor cells. During combination treatment, PD-L1- tumor cells were nearest to PD-L1- DCs and macrophages, while PD-L1+ tumor cells were next to PD-L1+ DCs and macrophages. High TMB was closely associated with a shorter distance from tumor cells to DCs and macrophages. Shorter distance between PD-L1+ tumor cells and PD-L1+ DCs or PD-L1- macrophages during the combination was correlated with better OS. Shorter distance between PD-L1- tumor cells and PD-L1- macrophages during combination was associated with both longer OS and PFS.ConclusionsPD-L1- or PD-L1+ DCs and macrophages exhibit distinct spatial distribution in ESCC. The close distance between tumor cells and these antigen-presenting cells (APCs) is critical to the clinical outcome in chemoradiotherapy combined with PD-1 blockade in ESCC patients. Our results highlight the predictive potential of spatial patterns of APCs in chemoradiotherapy combined with immunotherapy and reveal the underlying mechanism of APCs participating in chemoradiotherapy-induced antitumor immune response in ESCC.