Prednisolone or pentoxifylline for alcoholic hepatitis

BACKGROUND: Alcoholic hepatitis is a clinical syndrome characterized by jaundice and liver impairment that occurs in patients with a history of heavy and prolonged alcohol use. The short-term mortality among patients with severe disease exceeds 30%. Prednisolone and pentoxifylline are both recommended for the treatment of severe alcoholic hepatitis, but uncertainty about their benefit persists.METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, randomized trial with a 2-by-2 factorial design to evaluate the effect of treatment with prednisolone or pentoxifylline. The primary end point was mortality at 28 days. Secondary end points included death or liver transplantation at 90 days and at 1 year. Patients with a clinical diagnosis of alcoholic hepatitis and severe disease were randomly assigned to one of four groups: a group that received a pentoxifylline-matched placebo and a prednisolone-matched placebo, a group that received prednisolone and a pentoxifylline-matched placebo, a group that received pentoxifylline and a prednisolone-matched placebo, or a group that received both prednisolone and pentoxifylline.RESULTS: A total of 1103 patients underwent randomization, and data from 1053 were available for the primary end-point analysis. Mortality at 28 days was 17% (45 of 269 patients) in the placebo-placebo group, 14% (38 of 266 patients) in the prednisolone-placebo group, 19% (50 of 258 patients) in the pentoxifylline-placebo group, and 13% (35 of 260 patients) in the prednisolone-pentoxifylline group. The odds ratio for 28-day mortality with pentoxifylline was 1.07 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 1.49; P=0.69), and that with prednisolone was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.52 to 1.01; P=0.06). At 90 days and at 1 year, there were no significant between-group differences. Serious infections occurred in 13% of the patients treated with prednisolone versus 7% of those who did not receive prednisolone (P=0.002).CONCLUSIONS: Pentoxifylline did not improve survival in patients with alcoholic hepatitis. Prednisolone was associated with a reduction in 28-day mortality that did not reach significance and with no improvement in outcomes at 90 days or 1 year. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment program; STOPAH EudraCT number, 2009-013897-42 , and Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN88782125 ).</p

Pan-AKT inhibitor capivasertib with docetaxel and prednisolone in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a randomized, placebo-controlled phase II trial (ProCAID)

Purpose: Capivasertib is a pan-AKT inhibitor. Preclinical data indicate activity in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and synergism with docetaxel. Patients and Methods: ProCAID was a placebo controlled randomized phase II trial in mCRPC. Patients received up to ten 21-day cycles of docetaxel (75 mg/m2 intravenous, day 1) and prednisolone (5 mg twice daily, oral, day 1-21) and were randomly assigned (1:1) to oral capivasertib (320 mg twice daily, 4 days on/3 days off, from day 2 each cycle), or placebo, until disease progression. Treatment allocation used minimization factors: bone metastases; visceral metastases; investigational site; and prior abiraterone or enzalutamide. The primary objective, by intention to treat, determined if the addition of capivasertib prolonged a composite progression-free survival (cPFS) end point that included prostate-specific antigen progression events. cPFS and overall survival (OS) were also assessed by composite biomarker subgroup for PI3K/AKT/PTEN pathway activation status. Results: One hundred and fifty patients were enrolled. Median cPFS was 7.03 (95% CI, 6.28 to 8.25) and 6.70 months (95% CI, 5.52 to 7.36) with capivasertib and placebo respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.92; 80% CI, 0.73 to 1.16; one-sided P = .32). Median OS was 31.15 (95% CI, 20.07 to not reached) and 20.27 months (95% CI, 17.51 to 24.18), respectively (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.88; two-sided P = .01). cPFS and OS results were consistent irrespective of PI3K/AKT/PTEN pathway activation status. Grade III-IV adverse events were equivalent between arms (62.2%). The most common adverse events of any grade deemed related to capivasertib were diarrhea, fatigue, nausea, and rash. Conclusion: The addition of capivasertib to chemotherapy did not extend cPFS in mCRPC irrespective of PI3K/AKT/PTEN pathway activation status. The observed OS result (a secondary end point) will require prospective validation in future studies to address potential for bias

AGILE: a seamless phase I/IIa platform for the rapid evaluation of candidates for COVID-19 treatment: an update to the structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised platform trial letter.

Funder: UnitaidBACKGROUND: There is an urgent unmet clinical need for the identification of novel therapeutics for the treatment of COVID-19. A number of COVID-19 late phase trial platforms have been developed to investigate (often repurposed) drugs both in the UK and globally (e.g. RECOVERY led by the University of Oxford and SOLIDARITY led by WHO). There is a pressing need to investigate novel candidates within early phase trial platforms, from which promising candidates can feed into established later phase platforms. AGILE grew from a UK-wide collaboration to undertake early stage clinical evaluation of candidates for SARS-CoV-2 infection to accelerate national and global healthcare interventions. METHODS/DESIGN: AGILE is a seamless phase I/IIa platform study to establish the optimum dose, determine the activity and safety of each candidate and recommend whether it should be evaluated further. Each candidate is evaluated in its own trial, either as an open label single arm healthy volunteer study or in patients, randomising between candidate and control usually in a 2:1 allocation in favour of the candidate. Each dose is assessed sequentially for safety usually in cohorts of 6 patients. Once a phase II dose has been identified, efficacy is assessed by seamlessly expanding into a larger cohort. AGILE is completely flexible in that the core design in the master protocol can be adapted for each candidate based on prior knowledge of the candidate (i.e. population, primary endpoint and sample size can be amended). This information is detailed in each candidate specific trial protocol of the master protocol. DISCUSSION: Few approved treatments for COVID-19 are available such as dexamethasone, remdesivir and tocilizumab in hospitalised patients. The AGILE platform aims to rapidly identify new efficacious and safe treatments to help end the current global COVID-19 pandemic. We currently have three candidate specific trials within this platform study that are open to recruitment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT Number: 2020-001860-27 14 March 2020 ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04746183  19 February 2021 ISRCTN reference: 27106947

Honeybee guards do not use food-derived odors to recognise non-nestmates: a test of the Odor Convergence hypothesis.

Honeybee (Apis mellifera) colonies rob honey from each other during periods of nectar shortage. Persistent robbing can kill weak colonies. Primarily responsible for preventing robbing are guard bees. Previous research has shown that the probability of both nest mate and non-nest mate workers being accepted by guards at the nest entrance increases as nectar availability increases. The mechanism responsible for this change in guard acceptance can be explained by two competing hypotheses: Odor Convergence and Adaptive Threshold Shift. In this study we tested the Odor Convergence hypothesis. The acceptance by guards at the nest entrance of workers transferred between four colonies that had been fed either odorless sucrose syrup (two colonies) or diluted heather honey (Calluna vulgaris) (two colonies) was measured for 3 days before feeding and during 2 weeks of feeding. Despite the large sample sizes, the probability of guards accepting non-nest mates was not affected by the similarities or dissimilarities in food odor between guards' and non-nest mates' colonies. This finding contrasts with the accepted wisdom that food odors are important in nest mate recognition in honeybees and the data, therefore, strongly reject the Odor Convergence hypothesis

Honeybee guards do not use food-derived odors to recognize non-nest mates: a test of the Odor Convergence hypothesis

Honeybee (Apis mellifera) colonies rob honey from each other during periods of nectar shortage. Persistent robbing can kill weak colonies. Primarily responsible for preventing robbing are guard bees. Previous research has shown that the probability of both nest mate and non-nest mate workers being accepted by guards at the nest entrance increases as nectar availability increases. The mechanism responsible for this change in guard acceptance can be explained by two competing hypotheses: Odor Convergence and Adaptive Threshold Shift. In this study we tested the Odor Convergence hypothesis. The acceptance by guards at the nest entrance of workers transferred between four colonies that had been fed either odorless sucrose syrup (two colonies) or diluted heather honey (Calluna vulgaris) (two colonies) was measured for 3 days before feeding and during 2 weeks of feeding. Despite the large sample sizes, the probability of guards accepting non-nest mates was not affected by the similarities or dissimilarities in food odor between guards ’ and non-nest mates ’ colonies. This finding contrasts with the accepted wisdom that food odors are important in nest mate recognition in honeybees and the data, therefore, strongly reject the Odor Convergence hypothesis. Key words: Conspecific discrimination, environmentally-acquired odors, adaptive threshold shifts. [Behav Ecol 12:47–50 (2001)] Recognition is fundamental in maintaining the integrity of most social groups. Nest mate recognition is particularly important in social insects because neighboring colonies ofte

Overall survival update for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with capivasertib and docetaxel in the phase 2 ProCAID clinical trial

The PI3K/AKT/PTEN pathway is frequently deregulated in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). ProCAID was a phase 2 trial assessing addition of the AKT1/2/3 inhibitor capivasertib to docetaxel for patients with mCRPC. We previously reported that capivasertib did not extend a composite progression-free survival primary endpoint but did significantly improve the secondary endpoint of overall survival (OS). Here we present OS data after 66% of events had occurred in the intent-to-treat population (n = 150). Median OS was 25.3 mo for capivasertib plus docetaxel versus 20.3 mo for placebo plus docetaxel (hazard ratio [HR] 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47–1.05; nominal p = 0.09). Receipt of subsequent life-extending treatments was balanced between the treatment arms. The OS benefit associated with capivasertib was maintained in a subset of patients previously treated with abiraterone and/or enzalutamide (median OS 25.0 vs 17.6 mo; HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.36–0.91; nominal p = 0.02) but not in abiraterone/enzalutamide-naïve patients (median OS 31.1 mo vs not reached; HR 1.43, 95% CI 0.63–3.23). We conclude that OS may be extended by addition of capivasertib to docetaxel. Exploratory analysis revealed that the OS benefit was maintained in a subset of patients previously exposed to androgen receptor–targeted agents, which should be evaluated in prospective trials. Patient summary: The ProCAID study examined whether adding the AKT inhibitor drug capivasertib to docetaxel chemotherapy improves outcomes for patients with advanced prostate cancer. Initial analysis of the ProCAID results suggested that capivasertib improved overall survival benefit. This follow-up analysis suggests that capivasertib addition may be particularly beneficial for patients whose cancer was previously treated with drugs that target the androgen receptor

Overall survival update for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with Capivasertib and docetaxel in the Phase 2 ProCAID clinical trial

The PI3K/AKT/PTEN pathway is frequently deregulated in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). ProCAID was a phase 2 trial assessing addition of the AKT1/2/3 inhibitor capivasertib to docetaxel for patients with mCRPC. We previously reported that capivasertib did not extend a composite progression-free survival primary endpoint but did significantly improve the secondary endpoint of overall survival (OS). Here we present OS data after 66% of events had occurred in the intent-to-treat population (n = 150). Median OS was 25.3 mo for capivasertib plus docetaxel versus 20.3 mo for placebo plus docetaxel (hazard ratio [HR] 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-1.05; nominal p = 0.09). Receipt of subsequent life-extending treatments was balanced between the treatment arms. The OS benefit associated with capivasertib was maintained in a subset of patients previously treated with abiraterone and/or enzalutamide (median OS 25.0 vs 17.6 mo; HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.36-0.91; nominal p = 0.02) but not in abiraterone/enzalutamide-naïve patients (median OS 31.1 mo vs not reached; HR 1.43, 95% CI 0.63-3.23). We conclude that OS may be extended by addition of capivasertib to docetaxel. Exploratory analysis revealed that the OS benefit was maintained in a subset of patients previously exposed to androgen receptor-targeted agents, which should be evaluated in prospective trials. PATIENT SUMMARY: The ProCAID study examined whether adding the AKT inhibitor drug capivasertib to docetaxel chemotherapy improves outcomes for patients with advanced prostate cancer. Initial analysis of the ProCAID results suggested that capivasertib improved overall survival benefit. This follow-up analysis suggests that capivasertib addition may be particularly beneficial for patients whose cancer was previously treated with drugs that target the androgen receptor.</p