Comparison of surgical outcomes between iStent inject W implantation and microhook ab interno trabeculotomy in combination with phacoemulsification in primary open-angle glaucoma patients

PurposeTo examine primary open-angle glaucoma patients after undergoing combined cataract surgery with microhook ab interno trabeculotomy (μLOT-Phaco) or iStent inject W implantation (iStent-Phaco), and then evaluate the surgical outcomes after a minimum of 6 months of follow-up.MethodsBetween October 2020 and July 2022, 39 μLOT-Phaco eyes and 55 iStent-Phaco eyes that underwent surgery were evaluated in this retrospective, multicenter comparative case series. Data that included preoperative and postoperative intraocular pressure (IOP), number of glaucoma medications, and occurrence of complications were collected from medical records and then examined. Surgical failure was defined as patients exhibiting a < 20% reduction in the preoperative IOP or an IOP > 18 mmHg on two consecutive follow-up visits, or when patients were required to undergo reoperation. Success rates were determined based on a Kaplan–Meier survival analysis.ResultsAt 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively, there was a significant postoperative reduction in the IOP (p < 0.001) and in the medications scores (p < 0.001) for both of the groups. In the μLOT-Phaco and iStent-Phaco groups, the probabilities of success at 6 and 12 months were 55.3 and 45.5%, and 48.4 and 45.5% (p = 0.38; log-rank test), respectively. In the iStent-Phaco group, there was a significant decrease in the hyphema.ConclusionComparable surgical outcomes occurred for both the μLOT and iStent inject W procedures

Sequential therapies after atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or lenvatinib first-line treatments in hepatocellular carcinoma patients

Introduction: The aim of this retrospective proof-of-concept study was to compare different second-line treatments for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and progressive disease (PD) after first-line lenvatinib or atezolizumab plus bevacizumab.Materials and methods: A total of 1381 patients had PD at first-line therapy. 917 patients received lenvatinib as first-line treatment, and 464 patients atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as first-line.Results: 49.6% of PD patients received a second-line therapy without any statistical difference in overall survival (OS) between lenvatinib (20.6 months) and atezolizumab plus bev-acizumab first-line (15.7 months; p = 0.12; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.80). After lenvatinib first-line, there wasn't any statistical difference between second-line therapy subgroups (p = 0.27; sorafenib HR: 1; immunotherapy HR: 0.69; other therapies HR: 0.85). Patients who under-went trans-arterial chemo-embolization (TACE) had a significative longer OS than patients who received sorafenib (24.7 versus 15.8 months, p < 0.01; HR = 0.64). After atezolizumab plus bevacizumab first-line, there was a statistical difference between second-line therapy subgroups (p < 0.01; sorafenib HR: 1; lenvatinib HR: 0.50; cabozantinib HR: 1.29; other therapies HR: 0.54). Patients who received lenvatinib (17.0 months) and those who under-went TACE (15.9 months) had a significative longer OS than patients treated with sorafenib (14.2 months; respectively, p = 0.01; HR = 0.45, and p < 0.05; HR = 0.46).Conclusion: Approximately half of patients receiving first-line lenvatinib or atezolizumab plus bevacizumab access second-line treatment. Our data suggest that in patients progressed to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, the systemic therapy able to achieve the longest survival is lenvatinib, while in patients progressed to lenvatinib, the systemic therapy able to achieve the longest survival is immunotherapy

Clinical effects of direct hemoperfusion using a polymyxin B-immobilized fiber column in clinically amyopathic dermatomyositis-associated rapidly progressive interstitial pneumonias

Abstract Background Rapidly progressive interstitial pneumonias (RPIPs) associated with clinically amyopathic dermatomyositis (CADM) are highly resistant to therapy and have a poor prognosis. Multimodal therapies, including direct hemoperfusion using a polymyxin B-immobilized fiber column (PMX-DHP), have a protective effect on RPIPs. We evaluated the effects of PMX-DHP on CADM-associated RPIPs. Methods We retrospectively enrolled 14 patients with CADM-associated RPIPs and acute respiratory failure treated with PMX-DHP, corticosteroids, and immunosuppressive agents. Clinical manifestations were compared between survivors and non-survivors at 90 days after PMX-DHP. Results The survival rate at 90 days after PMX-DHP was 35.7% (5/14). Before PMX-DHP, the survivor group exhibited a significantly higher PaO2/FiO2 (P/F) ratio and serum surfactant protein-D (SP-D) levels and significantly lower lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and ferritin levels than the non-survivor group. Platelet counts were significantly decreased after PMX-DHP therapy in both groups, but remained higher in the survivor group than the non-survivor group over the course of treatment. Anti-melanoma differentiation-associated gene 5 (MDA-5) antibody positive patients demonstrated a poor 90-day survival rate, lower platelet counts and P/F ratio, and higher LDH levels than anti-MDA-5 antibody negative patients. Conclusions CADM-associated RPIPs with anti-MDA-5 antibody is associated with a very poor prognosis. A higher P/F ratio and SP-D level, lower LDH and ferritin levels, higher platelet counts, and anti-MDA-5 antibody negativity are important prognostic markers in patients with CADM-associated RPIPs treated with PMX-DHP

Relationship of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab treatment with muscle volume loss in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma patients– multicenter analysis

Background/Aim: There is no known report regarding the relationship of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) treatment with muscle volume loss (MVL) in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u-HCC) patients. This study aimed to elucidate the clinical relationship between MVL and Atez/Bev. Materials/Methods: From September 2020 to December 2021, 229 u-HCC patients treated with Atez/Bev and with muscle volume data obtained by computed tomography at the baseline available were analyzed (median age, 74 years; males, 186 (81.2%); ECOG PS 0/1, 221 (96.5%); HCV:HBV:alcohol:others=81:33:40:75; Child-Pugh A, 212 (92.6%); mALBI grade 1:2a:2b=79:60:90; BCLC 0:A:B:C =1:24:87:117; median observation period, 6.8 months). Japan Society of Hepatology criteria were used for definition of MVL and prognostic factors were retrospectively evaluated. Results: Multivariate Cox-hazard analysis of prognostic factors for progression-free survival (PFS) showed elevated alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) (≥100 ng/mL) (HR 1.848, 95%CI 1.264-2.702, P=0.002), modified albumin-bilirubin (mALBI) grade (≥2a) (HR 1.563, 95%CI 1.035-2.359, P=0.034), and MVL (HR 1.479, 95%CI 1.020-2.144, P=0.039) as significant factors. For overall survival (OS), significant factors included elevated AFP (≥100 ng/mL) (HR 3.564, 95%CI 1.856-6.844, P<0.001), mALBI grade (≥2a) (HR 3.451, 95%CI 1.580-7.538, P=0.002), and MVL (HR 2.119, 95%CI 1.150-3.904, P=0.016). Patients with MVL (MVL group, n=91) showed worse PFS than those without (non-MVL group, n=138) (median PFS 5.3 vs. 7.6 months, P=0.025), while the MVL group showed worse OS (P=0.038), though neither reached the median survival time. Conclusion: MVL may be a clinical factor related to poor prognosis in patients receiving Atez/Bev treatment for u-HCC

Effect of butyrate‐producing enterobacteria on advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treatment with atezolizumab and bevacizumab

Abstract Aim Multiple studies have revealed the correlation between gut microbiome and the response to checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) in patients with cancer, and oral administration of butyrate‐producing enterobacteria has been reported to enhance the efficacy of CPIs. However, the effects of enterobacteria on patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are not well understood. Methods In this retrospective multicenter study, we enrolled 747 patients with advanced HCC, treated with atezolizumab and bevacizumab combination therapy. Tumor response, survival, and adverse effects were compared between 99 patients who ingested drugs containing butyric acid‐producing enterobacteria (butyric acid group) and the remaining patients (control group). Results Objective response and disease control rates in butyric acid group (29.7% and 77.8%, respectively) were higher than those in the control group (26.4% and 72.7%, respectively). However, the differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.543 and p = 0.222, respectively). No difference in median survival time was observed between the two groups (20.0 months and 21.4 months, respectively; p = 0.789), even after matching the backgrounds of the patients with propensity scores (p = 0.714). No adverse effects occurred upon the administration of butyrate‐producing bacteria. However, proteinuria (41.4% vs. 30.9%; p = 0.041), fever (17.2% vs. 10.2%, p = 0.036), and diarrhea (15.2% vs. 6.2%; p = 0.001) occurred more frequently in the butyric acid group. Conclusion Butyrate‐producing bacteria does not enhance the efficacy of atezolizumab–bevacizumab combination therapy in patients with HCC

Comparative efficacy and safety of atezolizumab and bevacizumab between hepatocellular carcinoma patients with viral and non‐viral infection: A Japanese multicenter observational study

Abstract Aim This study compared the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab and bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) in patients with viral and non‐viral infection in clinical settings. Methods We conducted the retrospective cohort study of 323 BCLC stage B or C hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with Child‐Pugh class A, and a performance status of 0 or 1 who started Atez/Bev from September 2020 to December 2021 at 22 institutions in Japan. Patients with viral infection was defined as those who were either serum anti‐HCV‐ Ab or HBs‐Ag‐positive, while patients with non‐viral infection was defined as those who were both serum anti‐HCV Ab‐ and HBs‐Ag‐negative. We constructed a propensity‐score‐matched cohort to minimize the risk of observable potential confounders. Results Propensity score matching produced 126 matched pairs for patients with viral versus non‐viral infection. After matching, the significant differences in baseline demographic features did not exist between the two groups. The objective response rate was 20.6% and 24.6% in viral‐ and non‐viral‐related HCC patients, respectively, without a significant difference (p = 0.55). The disease control rate was not also significantly different (68.3% vs 69.0%, p = 1.00). The median progression‐free survival was 7.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.0–9.6) and 6.2 months (95% CI 5.1–7.8) in patients with viral and non‐viral infection, and the 12‐month survival rates were 65.5% (95% CI 50.8–76.8) and 71.7% (95% CI 57.3–81.9) in those with viral and non‐viral infection, respectively, which were not significantly different (p = 0.33, p = 0.38). No significant difference in treatment‐related adverse events was found between the two groups. Conclusions Our etiology‐based study demonstrated that Atez/Bev showed good efficacy and safety for HCC patient with non‐viral infection as well as those with viral infection