Pyronaridine–artesunate real-world safety, tolerability, and effectiveness in malaria patients in 5 African countries: A single-arm, open-label, cohort event monitoring study

Background In Phase II/III randomized controlled clinical trials for the treatment of acute uncomplicated malaria, pyronaridine–artesunate demonstrated high efficacy and a safety profile consistent with that of comparators, except that asymptomatic, mainly mild-to-moderate transient increases in liver aminotransferases were reported for some patients. Hepatic safety, tolerability, and effectiveness have not been previously assessed under real-world conditions in Africa. Methods and findings This single-arm, open-label, cohort event monitoring study was conducted at 6 health centers in Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Gabon, Ivory Coast, and Republic of Congo between June 2017 and April 2019. The trial protocol as closely as possible resembled real-world clinical practice for the treatment of malaria at the centers. Eligible patients were adults or children of either sex, weighing at least 5 kg, with acute uncomplicated malaria who did not have contraindications for pyronaridine–artesunate treatment as per the summary of product characteristics. Patients received fixed-dose pyronaridine–artesunate once daily for 3 days, dosed by body weight, without regard to food intake. A tablet formulation was used in adults and adolescents and a pediatric granule formulation in children and infants under 20 kg body weight. The primary outcome was the hepatic event incidence, defined as the appearance of the clinical signs and symptoms of hepatotoxicity confirmed by a >2× rise in alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase (ALT/AST) versus baseline in patients with baseline ALT/AST >2× the upper limit of normal (ULN). As a secondary outcome, this was assessed in patients with ALT/AST >2× ULN prior to treatment versus a matched cohort of patients with normal baseline ALT/AST. The safety population comprised 7,154 patients, of mean age 13.9 years (standard deviation (SD) 14.6), around half of whom were male (3,569 [49.9%]). Patients experienced 8,560 malaria episodes; 158 occurred in patients with baseline ALT/AST elevations >2×ULN. No protocol-defined hepatic events occurred following pyronaridine–artesunate treatment of malaria patients with or without baseline hepatic dysfunction. Thus, no cohort comparison could be undertaken. Also, as postbaseline clinical chemistry was only performed where clinically indicated, postbaseline ALT/AST levels were not systematically assessed for all patients. Adverse events of any cause occurred in 20.8% (1,490/7,154) of patients, most frequently pyrexia (5.1% [366/7,154]) and vomiting (4.2% [303/7,154]). Adjusting for Plasmodium falciparum reinfection, clinical effectiveness at day 28 was 98.6% ([7,369/7,746] 95% confidence interval (CI) 98.3 to 98.9) in the per-protocol population. There was no indication that comorbidities or malnutrition adversely affected outcomes. The key study limitation was that postbaseline clinical biochemistry was only evaluated when clinically indicated. Conclusions Pyronaridine–artesunate had good tolerability and effectiveness in a representative African population under conditions similar to everyday clinical practice. These findings support pyronaridine–artesunate as an operationally useful addition to the management of acute uncomplicated malaria. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03201770.

Real-world intensive safety monitoring of biosimilars rituximab and trastuzumab in a Portuguese oncology hospital

Purpose The aim of this study was to assess the safety profiles of two biosimilar medicines (rituximab and trastuzumab) in the treatment of cancer patients within a Portuguese oncology hospital. Methods This hospital-based prospective observational study followed a cohort event monitoring approach focused on signalling suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Patients undergoing treatment with rituximab biosimilar CT-P10 (Truxima®) or trastuzumab biosimilar CT-P6 (Herzuma®) were recruited over an 11-month and a 6-month period, respectively. Clinicians identified eligible patients and used paper-based forms to report all ADRs associated with biosimilar medicines. ADR case reports were assessed for seriousness, expectedness and causality in the Pharmacovigilance Unit of Coimbra. Results Ninety-four patients received biosimilar medicines (rituximab, n = 35; trastuzumab, n = 59). Of those, 4 patients (11.4%) experienced 16 ADRs with rituximab and 1 patient (1.7%) experienced 5 ADRs with trastuzumab. All case reports contained serious and expected ADRs that were at least probably related with biosimilar medicines under study. Based on the MedDRA PT coding, the most reported ADR for rituximab CT-P10 was chest discomfort (n = 4; 19.1%), followed by odynophagia (n = 2; 9.5%). Trastuzumab CT-P6 was associated with back pain, headache, pain in extremity, tachypnoea and tremor (each, n = 1; 4.8%). Conclusion The results of this study suggest that using biosimilar rituximab and biosimilar trastuzumab to treat cancer patients in the real-world clinical setting is associated with acceptable safety profiles. No new safety problems were identified.

Observational assessment of safety in seroquel (OASIS): a specialist cohort event monitoring (SCEM) study in England

Background: This study was designed to monitor the short-term (up to 12 weeks) use and safety of quetiapine (Seroquel) extended release (XL) and quetiapine immediate release (IR) prescribed to patients with a clinical diagnosis of schizophrenia, and/or manic episodes associated with bipolar disorder by psychiatrists under normal conditions of use. Methods: A Specialist Cohort Event Monitoring (SCEM) study was conducted in England February 2010–April 2013. This observational cohort study recruited patients prescribed quetiapine XL within the secondary care setting by psychiatrists. A reference cohort of quetiapine IR users was also recruited. Baseline and 12 week observational data were collected from psychiatrists who abstracted information from medical records onto bespoke questionnaires. Data were collected on demographics, indication, past medical history, prescribing information and events of interest. Summary descriptive statistics were calculated. Results: The final cohort consisted of 869 eligible patients; 646 XL users and 223 IR users. The majority of XL and IR users were female (56.2% and 55.6%, respectively), with a median age of 40 (interquartile range [IQR]: 29, 49) and 39 (IQR: 28, 50) years, respectively. The most frequent indication for treatment was Manic episodes associated with Bipolar Affective disorder (53.4% XL and 49.8% IR). Median index dose was 200 mg/day (IQR: 100, 300) for XL users and 50 mg/day (IQR: 50, 100) for IR users, while median final maintenance dose was 400mg/day (IQR: 250, 600) and 300 mg/day (IQR: 100, 400), respectively. The most frequently reported event of interest in both cohorts was sedation ( n = 151, 23.9% XL cohort and n = 49, 23.0% IR cohort). Conclusion: Utilisation of quetiapine XL appeared to be in line with prescribing guidelines in terms of dose, and commonly reported events of interest were in concordance with the known safety profile. Overall, this SCEM study provided important information on the safety and utilisation of quetiapine XL in the secondary care setting in England.