Balancing efficacy and tolerability of first-line systemic therapies for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a network metanalysis

Background: Atezolizumab+Bevacizumab represents the current standard of care for first-line treatment of advanced HCC. However, direct comparison with other combination treatments including immune-checkpoint inhibitors(ICI)+tyrosine-kinase inhibitors(TKIs) are lacking. Objectives: This network meta-analysis(NMA) aims to indirectly compare the efficacy and the safety of first-line systemic therapies for unresectable-advanced HCC. Method:A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and SCOPUS databases was conducted up to 31st October, 2022. Phase III randomized controlled trials(RCTs) testing TKIs, including Sorafenib and Lenvatinib, or ICIs reporting overall survival(OS) and progression-free survival(PFS) were included. Individual survival data were extracted from OS and PFS curves to calculate restricted mean survival time (RMST). A Bayesian NMA was performed to compare treatments in terms of efficacy(15- and 30-month OS, 6-month PFS) and safety, represented by grade≥3(severe)adverse events(SAEs). The incremental safety-effectiveness ratio(ISER) as measure of net health benefit was calculated as the difference in SAEs probability divided by survival difference between the 2 most effective treatments. Results:Nine RCTs enrolling 6600 patients were included. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed the highest probability(88%)of achieving the 30-month OS landmark. Lenvatinib showed a probability of 86% of achieving best PFS outcomes. ICI monotherapies ranked as most tolerable. Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab showed the best net health benefit for OS, compared to Durvalumab plus Tremelimumab. When evaluating the net health benefit for PFS, at a willingness-to-risk threshold of 10% of SAEs for life-month gained, Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab was favored in 78% of cases, while at threshold of 30% of SAEs for life-month gained, Lenvatinib was favored in 76% of cases. Conclusions: Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab is the best treatment in terms of net benefit and therefore it should be recommended as standard of care. Compared to Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab, Lenvatinib monotherapy had the best net benefit for PFS when physicians and patients are available to accept a higher risk of toxicity

An optical coherence tomography-based grading of diabetic maculopathy proposed by an international expert panel: The European School for Advanced Studies in Ophthalmology classification.

Aims:To present an authoritative, universal, easy-to-use morphologic classification of diabetic maculopathy based on spectral domain optical coherence tomography.Methods:The first draft of the project was developed based on previously published classifications and a literature search regarding the spectral domain optical coherence tomography quantitative and qualitative features of diabetic maculopathy. This draft was sent to an international panel of retina experts for a first revision. The panel met at the European School for Advanced Studies in Ophthalmology headquarters in Lugano, Switzerland, and elaborated the final document.Results:Seven tomographic qualitative and quantitative features are taken into account and scored according to a grading protocol termed TCED-HFV, which includes foveal thickness (T), corresponding to either central subfoveal thickness or macular volume, intraretinal cysts (C), the ellipsoid zone (EZ) and/or external limiting membrane (ELM) status (E), presence of disorganization of the inner retinal layers (D), number of hyperreflective foci (H), subfoveal fluid (F), and vitreoretinal relationship (V). Four different stages of the disease, that is, early diabetic maculopathy, advanced diabetic maculopathy, severe diabetic maculopathy, and atrophic maculopathy, are based on the first four variables, namely the T, C, E, and D. The different stages reflect progressive severity of the disease.Conclusion:A novel grading system of diabetic maculopathy is hereby proposed. The classification is aimed at providing a simple, direct, objective tool to classify diabetic maculopathy (irrespective to the treatment status) even for non-retinal experts and can be used for therapeutic and prognostic purposes, as well as for correct evaluation and reproducibility of clinical investigations

Disease-Modifying Therapies and Coronavirus Disease 2019 Severity in Multiple Sclerosis

Objective: This study was undertaken to assess the impact of immunosuppressive and immunomodulatory therapies on the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS). Methods: We retrospectively collected data of PwMS with suspected or confirmed COVID-19. All the patients had complete follow-up to death or recovery. Severe COVID-19 was defined by a 3-level variable: mild disease not requiring hospitalization versus pneumonia or hospitalization versus intensive care unit (ICU) admission or death. We evaluated baseline characteristics and MS therapies associated with severe COVID-19 by multivariate and propensity score (PS)-weighted ordinal logistic models. Sensitivity analyses were run to confirm the results. Results: Of 844 PwMS with suspected (n = 565) or confirmed (n = 279) COVID-19, 13 (1.54%) died; 11 of them were in a progressive MS phase, and 8 were without any therapy. Thirty-eight (4.5%) were admitted to an ICU; 99 (11.7%) had radiologically documented pneumonia; 96 (11.4%) were hospitalized. After adjusting for region, age, sex, progressive MS course, Expanded Disability Status Scale, disease duration, body mass index, comorbidities, and recent methylprednisolone use, therapy with an anti-CD20 agent (ocrelizumab or rituximab) was significantly associated (odds ratio [OR] = 2.37, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.18-4.74, p = 0.015) with increased risk of severe COVID-19. Recent use (<1 month) of methylprednisolone was also associated with a worse outcome (OR = 5.24, 95% CI = 2.20-12.53, p = 0.001). Results were confirmed by the PS-weighted analysis and by all the sensitivity analyses. Interpretation: This study showed an acceptable level of safety of therapies with a broad array of mechanisms of action. However, some specific elements of risk emerged. These will need to be considered while the COVID-19 pandemic persists

Beta-Blocker Use in Older Hospitalized Patients Affected by Heart Failure and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: An Italian Survey From the REPOSI Register

Beta (β)-blockers (BB) are useful in reducing morbidity and mortality in patients with heart failure (HF) and concomitant chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Nevertheless, the use of BBs could induce bronchoconstriction due to β2-blockade. For this reason, both the ESC and GOLD guidelines strongly suggest the use of selective β1-BB in patients with HF and COPD. However, low adherence to guidelines was observed in multiple clinical settings. The aim of the study was to investigate the BBs use in older patients affected by HF and COPD, recorded in the REPOSI register. Of 942 patients affected by HF, 47.1% were treated with BBs. The use of BBs was significantly lower in patients with HF and COPD than in patients affected by HF alone, both at admission and at discharge (admission, 36.9% vs. 51.3%; discharge, 38.0% vs. 51.7%). In addition, no further BB users were found at discharge. The probability to being treated with a BB was significantly lower in patients with HF also affected by COPD (adj. OR, 95% CI: 0.50, 0.37-0.67), while the diagnosis of COPD was not associated with the choice of selective β1-BB (adj. OR, 95% CI: 1.33, 0.76-2.34). Despite clear recommendations by clinical guidelines, a significant underuse of BBs was also observed after hospital discharge. In COPD affected patients, physicians unreasonably reject BBs use, rather than choosing a β1-BB. The expected improvement of the BB prescriptions after hospitalization was not observed. A multidisciplinary approach among hospital physicians, general practitioners, and pharmacologists should be carried out for better drug management and adherence to guideline recommendations

Magnitude, temporal trends, and projections of the global prevalence of blindness and distance and near vision impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Global and regional prevalence estimates for blindness and vision impairment are important for the development of public health policies. We aimed to provide global estimates, trends, and projections of global blindness and vision impairment. Methods: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of population-based datasets relevant to global vision impairment and blindness that were published between 1980 and 2015. We fitted hierarchical models to estimate the prevalence (by age, country, and sex), in 2015, of mild visual impairment (presenting visual acuity worse than 6/12 to 6/18 inclusive), moderate to severe visual impairment (presenting visual acuity worse than 6/18 to 3/60 inclusive), blindness (presenting visual acuity worse than 3/60), and functional presbyopia (defined as presenting near vision worse than N6 or N8 at 40 cm when best-corrected distance visual acuity was better than 6/12). Findings: Globally, of the 7·33 billion people alive in 2015, an estimated 36·0 million (80% uncertainty interval [UI] 12·9–65·4) were blind (crude prevalence 0·48%; 80% UI 0·17–0·87; 56% female), 216·6 million (80% UI 98·5–359·1) people had moderate to severe visual impairment (2·95%, 80% UI 1·34–4·89; 55% female), and 188·5 million (80% UI 64·5–350·2) had mild visual impairment (2·57%, 80% UI 0·88–4·77; 54% female). Functional presbyopia affected an estimated 1094·7 million (80% UI 581·1–1686·5) people aged 35 years and older, with 666·7 million (80% UI 364·9–997·6) being aged 50 years or older. The estimated number of blind people increased by 17·6%, from 30·6 million (80% UI 9·9–57·3) in 1990 to 36·0 million (80% UI 12·9–65·4) in 2015. This change was attributable to three factors, namely an increase because of population growth (38·4%), population ageing after accounting for population growth (34·6%), and reduction in age-specific prevalence (–36·7%). The number of people with moderate and severe visual impairment also increased, from 159·9 million (80% UI 68·3–270·0) in 1990 to 216·6 million (80% UI 98·5–359·1) in 2015. Interpretation: There is an ongoing reduction in the age-standardised prevalence of blindness and visual impairment, yet the growth and ageing of the world’s population is causing a substantial increase in number of people affected. These observations, plus a very large contribution from uncorrected presbyopia, highlight the need to scale up vision impairment alleviation efforts at all levels

Global causes of blindness and distance vision impairment 1990–2020: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Contemporary data on causes of vision impairment and blindness form an important basis for recommendations in public health policies. Refreshment of the Global Vision Database with recently published data sources permitted modeling of cause of vision loss data from 1990 to 2015, further disaggregation by cause, and forecasts to 2020. Methods: Published and unpublished population-based data on the causes of vision impairment and blindness from 1980 to 2015 were systematically analysed. A series of regression models were fit to estimate the proportion of moderate and severe vision impairment (MSVI; defined as presenting visual acuity <6/18 but ≥3/60 in the better eye) and blindness (presenting visual acuity <3/60 in the better eye) by cause by age, region, and year. Findings: Among the projected global population with MSVI (216.6 million; 80% uncertainty intervals [UI] 98.5-359.1), in 2015 the leading causes thereof are uncorrected refractive error (116.3 million; UI 49.4-202.1), cataract (52.6 million; UI 18.2-109.6), age-related macular degeneration (AMD; 8.4 million; UI 0.9-29.5), glaucoma (4.0 million; UI 0.6-13.3) and diabetic retinopathy (2.6 million; UI 0.2-9.9). In 2015, the leading global causes of blindness were cataract (12.6 million; UI 3.4-28.7) followed by uncorrected refractive error (7.4 million; UI 2.4-14.8) and glaucoma (2.9 million; UI 0.4-9.9), while by 2020, these numbers affected are anticipated to rise to 13.4 million, 8.0 million and 3.2 million, respectively. Cataract and uncorrected refractive error combined contributed to 55% of blindness and 77% of MSVI in adults aged 50 years and older in 2015. World regions varied markedly in the causes of blindness, with a relatively low prevalence of cataract and a relatively high prevalence of AMD as causes for vision loss in the High-income subregions. Blindness due to cataract and diabetic retinopathy was more common among women, while blindness due to glaucoma and corneal opacity was more common among men, with no gender difference related to AMD. Conclusions: The numbers of people affected by the common causes of vision loss have increased substantially as the population increases and ages. Preventable vision loss due to cataract and refractive error (reversible with surgery and spectacle correction respectively), continue to cause the majority of blindness and MSVI in adults aged 50+ years. A massive scale up of eye care provision to cope with the increasing numbers is needed if one is to address avoidable vision loss

The “Diabetes Comorbidome”: A Different Way for Health Professionals to Approach the Comorbidity Burden of Diabetes

(1) Background: The disease burden related to diabetes is increasing greatly, particularly in older subjects. A more comprehensive approach towards the assessment and management of diabetes’ comorbidities is necessary. The aim of this study was to implement our previous data identifying and representing the prevalence of the comorbidities, their association with mortality, and the strength of their relationship in hospitalized elderly patients with diabetes, developing, at the same time, a new graphic representation model of the comorbidome called “Diabetes Comorbidome”. (2) Methods: Data were collected from the RePoSi register. Comorbidities, socio-demographic data, severity and comorbidity indexes (Cumulative Illness rating Scale CIRS-SI and CIRS-CI), and functional status (Barthel Index), were recorded. Mortality rates were assessed in hospital and 3 and 12 months after discharge. (3) Results: Of the 4714 hospitalized elderly patients, 1378 had diabetes. The comorbidities distribution showed that arterial hypertension (57.1%), ischemic heart disease (31.4%), chronic renal failure (28.8%), atrial fibrillation (25.6%), and COPD (22.7%), were the more frequent in subjects with diabetes. The graphic comorbidome showed that the strongest predictors of death at in hospital and at the 3-month follow-up were dementia and cancer. At the 1-year follow-up, cancer was the first comorbidity independently associated with mortality. (4) Conclusions: The “Diabetes Comorbidome” represents the perfect instrument for determining the prevalence of comorbidities and the strength of their relationship with risk of death, as well as the need for an effective treatment for improving clinical outcomes

Antidiabetic Drug Prescription Pattern in Hospitalized Older Patients with Diabetes

Objective: To describe the prescription pattern of antidiabetic and cardiovascular drugs in a cohort of hospitalized older patients with diabetes. Methods: Patients with diabetes aged 65 years or older hospitalized in internal medicine and/or geriatric wards throughout Italy and enrolled in the REPOSI (REgistro POliterapuie SIMI—Società Italiana di Medicina Interna) registry from 2010 to 2019 and discharged alive were included. Results: Among 1703 patients with diabetes, 1433 (84.2%) were on treatment with at least one antidiabetic drug at hospital admission, mainly prescribed as monotherapy with insulin (28.3%) or metformin (19.2%). The proportion of treated patients decreased at discharge (N = 1309, 76.9%), with a significant reduction over time. Among those prescribed, the proportion of those with insulin alone increased over time (p = 0.0066), while the proportion of those prescribed sulfonylureas decreased (p &lt; 0.0001). Among patients receiving antidiabetic therapy at discharge, 1063 (81.2%) were also prescribed cardiovascular drugs, mainly with an antihypertensive drug alone or in combination (N = 777, 73.1%). Conclusion: The management of older patients with diabetes in a hospital setting is often sub-optimal, as shown by the increasing trend in insulin at discharge, even if an overall improvement has been highlighted by the prevalent decrease in sulfonylureas prescription

Clinical features and outcomes of elderly hospitalised patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure or both

Background and objective: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and heart failure (HF) mutually increase the risk of being present in the same patient, especially if older. Whether or not this coexistence may be associated with a worse prognosis is debated. Therefore, employing data derived from the REPOSI register, we evaluated the clinical features and outcomes in a population of elderly patients admitted to internal medicine wards and having COPD, HF or COPD + HF. Methods: We measured socio-demographic and anthropometric characteristics, severity and prevalence of comorbidities, clinical and laboratory features during hospitalization, mood disorders, functional independence, drug prescriptions and discharge destination. The primary study outcome was the risk of death. Results: We considered 2,343 elderly hospitalized patients (median age 81 years), of whom 1,154 (49%) had COPD, 813 (35%) HF, and 376 (16%) COPD + HF. Patients with COPD + HF had different characteristics than those with COPD or HF, such as a higher prevalence of previous hospitalizations, comorbidities (especially chronic kidney disease), higher respiratory rate at admission and number of prescribed drugs. Patients with COPD + HF (hazard ratio HR 1.74, 95% confidence intervals CI 1.16-2.61) and patients with dementia (HR 1.75, 95% CI 1.06-2.90) had a higher risk of death at one year. The Kaplan-Meier curves showed a higher mortality risk in the group of patients with COPD + HF for all causes (p = 0.010), respiratory causes (p = 0.006), cardiovascular causes (p = 0.046) and respiratory plus cardiovascular causes (p = 0.009). Conclusion: In this real-life cohort of hospitalized elderly patients, the coexistence of COPD and HF significantly worsened prognosis at one year. This finding may help to better define the care needs of this population

Clinical features and outcomes of elderly hospitalised patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure or both

Background and objective: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and heart failure (HF) mutually increase the risk of being present in the same patient, especially if older. Whether or not this coexistence may be associated with a worse prognosis is debated. Therefore, employing data derived from the REPOSI register, we evaluated the clinical features and outcomes in a population of elderly patients admitted to internal medicine wards and having COPD, HF or COPD + HF. Methods: We measured socio-demographic and anthropometric characteristics, severity and prevalence of comorbidities, clinical and laboratory features during hospitalization, mood disorders, functional independence, drug prescriptions and discharge destination. The primary study outcome was the risk of death. Results: We considered 2,343 elderly hospitalized patients (median age 81&nbsp;years), of whom 1,154 (49%) had COPD, 813 (35%) HF, and 376 (16%) COPD + HF. Patients with COPD + HF had different characteristics than those with COPD or HF, such as a higher prevalence of previous hospitalizations, comorbidities (especially chronic kidney disease), higher respiratory rate at admission and number of prescribed drugs. Patients with COPD + HF (hazard ratio HR 1.74, 95% confidence intervals CI 1.16-2.61) and patients with dementia (HR 1.75, 95% CI 1.06-2.90) had a higher risk of death at one year. The Kaplan-Meier curves showed a higher mortality risk in the group of patients with COPD + HF for all causes (p = 0.010), respiratory causes (p = 0.006), cardiovascular causes (p = 0.046) and respiratory plus cardiovascular causes (p = 0.009). Conclusion: In this real-life cohort of hospitalized elderly patients, the coexistence of COPD and HF significantly worsened prognosis at one year. This finding may help to better define the care needs of this population