Pharmacotherapy最新文献

Aim: This retrospective cohort study aimed to compare the risk of serious infections in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors (TNFαi) and interleukin-6 inhibitors (IL-6i), with no prior use of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs).

Methods: We employed the nationwide insurance claims database encompassing the years 2005 to 2018 in Japan. The inclusion criteria specified patients who were prescribed any type of bDMARDs, including TNFαi and IL-6i. The following exclusion criteria were applied: missing prescription dates, RA not diagnosed, below 16 years of age, bDMARDs prescribed within 6 months of registration, RA diagnosed post-bDMARDs prescription, and incidence of serious infections within 2 weeks before bDMARDs therapy. We applied stabilized inverse probability weights and utilized a Cox regression model to estimate the risk of serious infections associated with TNFαi and IL-6i.

Results: The cohort of 2493 patients with RA was categorized into a TNFαi group and an IL-6i group of 2018 and 475 participants, respectively. The median follow-up duration (interquartile range) was 347 (147-820) days in the TNFαi group and 369 (149-838) days in the IL-6i group. In the inverse probability-weighted cohort, the incidence rates (95% confidence interval) of serious infections were 2.13 (1.65-2.71) and 3.25 (2.15-4.69) per 100 person-years for the TNFαi and IL-6i groups, respectively. The hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) comparing the TNFαi group to the IL-6i group was 0.66 (0.36-1.20, p = 0.168).

Discussion: The results underscore the lack of evidence to preferentially favor either TNFαi or IL-6i as later-line therapy in the management of bDMARDs-naive RA to mitigate the risk of serious infections.

Background: The CRC-VTE trial conducted in China revealed a significant occurrence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients following colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery, raising concerns about implementing thromboprophylaxis measures. The present study aimed to identify and analyze inappropriate aspects of current thromboprophylaxis practices.

Methods: This study performed an analysis of the CRC-VTE trial, a prospective multicenter study that enrolled 1836 patients who underwent CRC surgery. The primary objective was to identify independent risk factors for VTE after CRC surgery using multivariate logistic regression analysis. Furthermore, among the cases in which VTE occurred, the appropriateness of thromboprophylaxis was assessed based on several factors, including pharmacologic prophylaxis, time to initiate prophylaxis, drug selection, drug dosage, and duration of pharmacologic prophylaxis. Based on the analysis of the current state of thromboprophylaxis and relevant clinical guidelines, a modified Delphi method was used to develop a clinical pathway for VTE prophylaxis after CRC surgery.

Results: In this analysis of 1836 patients, 205 (11.2%) were diagnosed with VTE during follow-up. The multifactorial analysis identified several independent risk factors for VTE, including age (≥70 years), female sex, varicose veins in the lower extremities, intraoperative blood transfusion, and the duration of immobilization exceeding 24 h. None of the patients diagnosed with VTE in the CRC trial received adequate thromboprophylaxis. The main reasons for this inappropriate practice were the omission of thromboprophylaxis, delayed initiation, and insufficient duration of thromboprophylaxis. We developed a specialized clinical pathway for thromboprophylaxis after CRC surgery to address these issues.

Conclusions: This study offers a comprehensive nationwide evaluation of existing thromboprophylaxis practices in patients after CRC surgery in China. A specialized clinical pathway was developed to address the identified gaps and improve the quality of care. This clinical pathway incorporates explicit, tailored, detailed recommendations for thromboprophylaxis after CRC surgery.

Management of invasive fungal infections is challenging with growing antifungal resistance. Broad antifungal use has resulted in greater intrinsic and acquired resistance among Candida spp. It is important for clinicians to recognize the relationship between host susceptibility, site of infection, Candida resistance profiles, specific drug pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, and the role of novel antifungal agents. This narrative review covers the role of rezafungin, ibrexafungerp, and fosmanogepix in the management of invasive candidiasis (IC). The PubMed Database, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched between January 2006 and January 2024 using the following terms: rezafungin, CD101, ibrexafungerp, SCY-078, fosmanogepix, APX001, candidemia, and invasive candidiasis. Review articles, prospective clinical trials, and observational studies published in the English language were reviewed. Studies evaluating pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety in animals and humans were also reviewed. Promising data continues to emerge in support of novel drug therapies for IC and candidemia. Rezafungin possesses a unique pharmacodynamic profile that might be advantageous compared to other echinocandins, with a practical, once-weekly dosing interval. Ibrexafungerp, currently approved for vulvovaginal candidiasis, has been studied off-label for use in IC and candidemia, and initial data is encouraging. Lastly, fosmanogepix, a mechanistically novel, investigational antifungal agent, may be a potential future option in the management of IC and candidemia. Future research is needed to evaluate the potential use of these agents among diverse patient populations.

Introduction: Rezafungin is a second-generation, once-weekly echinocandin antifungal approved for the treatment of invasive candidiasis, including candidemia. In phase II/III studies of rezafungin versus caspofungin, patients with severe hepatic impairment were excluded due to lack of caspofungin data in this population. This open-label, single-dose, phase I study evaluated the pharmacokinetics (primary objective) and safety of rezafungin in subjects with moderate or severe hepatic impairment versus matched, healthy subjects with normal hepatic function.

Methods: Eight subjects each with moderate (Child-Pugh B) or severe (Child-Pugh C) hepatic impairment were matched 1:1 with healthy subjects for age, sex, and body mass index. Each subject received a single 400-mg, intravenous, 1-h infusion of rezafungin. Plasma pharmacokinetic sampling was performed at various time points through 336 h postdose. Pharmacokinetic parameters were derived by non-compartmental analysis. Safety was assessed throughout.

Results: All 32 subjects received study treatment and were included in all analyses. Despite overlapping distributions of total plasma concentrations, based on geometric least-squares (LS) mean ratios, the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero (prior to the start of infusion) to infinity (AUC_0-∞) was 32% lower in subjects with moderate (LS mean ratio, 67.55; 90% confidence interval [CI]: 53.91, 84.65) and severe (LS mean ratio, 67.84; 90% CI: 57.49, 80.05) hepatic impairment versus matched healthy subjects. The maximum plasma concentration (C_max) was 12% lower in moderate hepatic impairment and 28% lower in severe hepatic impairment groups. Linear regression showed no significant trend in the degree of hepatic impairment (based on Child-Pugh score) on AUC_0-∞ or C_max (p > 0.05). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in seven subjects (21.9%; three subjects in each of the hepatic impairment groups, and one healthy subject), none of which were severe, serious, or resulted in withdrawal.

Conclusions: Rezafungin is well tolerated and can be administered to patients with moderate or severe hepatic impairment without the need for dose adjustment. The modest reduction in exposures in subjects with hepatic impairment is not clinically meaningful and is unlikely to impact efficacy.

Introduction: Based on the recent guidelines for vancomycin therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), the area under the curve to minimum inhibitory concentration ratio was to be employed combined with the usage of population pharmacokinetic (popPK) model for dosing adaptation. Yet, deploying these models in a clinical setting requires an external evaluation of their performance.

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate existing vancomycin popPK models from the literature for the use in TDM within the general patient population in a clinical setting.

Methods: The models under external evaluation were chosen based on a review of literature covering vancomycin popPK models developed in general adult populations. Patients' data were collected from Charles-Le Moyne Hospital (CLMH). The external evaluation was performed with NONMEM® (v7.5). Additional analyses such as evaluating the impact of number of samples on external evaluation, Bayesian forecasting, and a priori dosing regimen simulations were performed on the best performing model.

Results: Eight popPK models were evaluated with an independent dataset that included 40 patients and 252 samples. The model developed by Goti and colleagues demonstrated superior performance in diagnostic plots and population predictive performance, with bias and inaccuracy values of 0.251% and 22.7%, respectively, and for individual predictive performance, bias and inaccuracy were -4.90% and 12.1%, respectively. When limiting the independent dataset to one or two samples per patient, the Goti model exhibited inadequate predictive performance for inaccuracy, with values exceeding 30%. Moreover, the Goti model is suitable for Bayesian forecasting with at least two samples as prior for the prediction of the next trough concentration. Furthermore, the vancomycin dosing regimen that would maximize therapeutic targets of area under the curve to minimum inhibitory concentration ratio (AUC₂₄/MIC) and trough concentrations (C_trough) for the Goti model was 20 mg/kg/dose twice daily.

Conclusion: Considering the superior predictive performance and potential for Bayesian forecasting in the Goti model, future research aims to test its applicability in clinical settings at CLMH, both in a priori and a posteriori scenario.

Sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are used for the treatment of diabetes and for their cardiovascular and kidney benefits in patients with or without diabetes. Use in solid organ transplant recipients is controversial because transplant recipients were excluded from the major clinical trials assessing SGLT2 inhibitors. The goal of this review was to assess the available literature regarding the use of SGLT2 inhibitors in solid organ transplant recipients. A PubMed search was conducted for studies published in English through December 31, 2023. Studies were excluded if they were meta-analyses, review articles, commentaries, single case reports, or in vitro studies, or did not involve the use of SGLT2 inhibitors in solid organ transplant recipients with a diabetic, cardiovascular, or kidney outcome being assessed. In the final review, 20 studies were included: kidney (n = 15), heart (n = 4), and liver/lung/kidney (n = 1) transplant recipients. SGLT2 inhibitors had similar A1c reduction efficacy and were found to be weight neutral with possible weight reduction effects. Cardiovascular and kidney outcomes were not adequately assessed in the available studies. Adverse effects were reported to occur at a similar rate in transplant recipients compared to the general population. SGLT2 inhibitors were initiated ≥1-year post-transplant in most transplant recipients included in these studies. The overall safety and antihyperglycemic efficacy of SGLT2 inhibitors in kidney and heart transplant recipients is similar to the general population. Data assessing SGLT2 inhibitors use in solid organ transplant recipients for longer durations are needed.

Treatment options are currently limited for persons with HIV-1 (PWH) who are heavily treatment-experienced and/or have multidrug-resistant HIV-1. Three agents have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) since 2018, representing a significant advancement for this population: ibalizumab, fostemsavir, and lenacapavir. However, there is a paucity of recommendations endorsed by national and international guidelines describing the optimal use (e.g., selection and monitoring after initiation) of these novel antiretrovirals in this population. To address this gap, a modified Delphi technique was used to develop these consensus recommendations that establish a framework for initiating and managing ibalizumab, fostemsavir, or lenacapavir in PWH who are heavily treatment-experienced and/or have multidrug-resistant HIV-1. In addition, future areas of research are also identified and discussed.

Treatment options are currently limited for persons with HIV-1 (PWH) who are heavily treatment-experienced and/or have multidrug-resistant HIV-1. Three agents have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) since 2018, representing a significant advancement for this population: ibalizumab, fostemsavir, and lenacapavir. However, there is a paucity of recommendations endorsed by national and international guidelines describing the optimal use (e.g., selection and monitoring after initiation) of these novel antiretrovirals in this population. To address this gap, a modified Delphi technique was used to develop these consensus recommendations that establish a framework for initiating and managing ibalizumab, fostemsavir, or lenacapavir in PWH who are heavily treatment-experienced and/or have multidrug-resistant HIV-1. In addition, future areas of research are also identified and discussed in the main document.