Systematic review and stratified meta-analysis of the efficacy of carnosine in animal models of ischemic stroke

Carnosine is a naturally occurring pleotropic dipeptide which influences multiple deleterious mechanisms that are activated during stroke. Numerous published studies have reported that carnosine has robust efficacy in ischemic stroke models. To further evaluate these data, we have conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies. We included publications describing in vivo models of ischemic stroke where the neuroprotective efficacy of carnosine was being evaluated through the reporting of infarct volume and/or neurological score as outcomes. Overall efficacy was evaluated using weighted mean difference random effects meta-analysis. We also evaluated for study quality and publication bias. We identified eight publications that met our inclusion criteria describing a total of 29 comparisons and 454 animals. Overall methodological quality of studies was moderate (median ¼ 4/9). Carnosine reduced infarct volume by 29.4% (95% confidence interval (CI), 24.0% to 34.9%; 29 comparisons). A clear dose-response effect was observed, and efficacy was reduced when carnosine was administered more than 6 h after ischemia. Our findings suggest that carnosine administered before or after the onset of ischemia exhibits robust efficacy in experimental ischemic stroke. However, the methodological quality of some of the studies was low and testing occurred only in healthy young male animals

Ceftazidime-avibactam or best available therapy in patients with ceftazidime-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa complicated urinary tract infections or complicated intra-abdominal infections (REPRISE): a randomised, pathogen-directed, phase 3 study

Background Carbapenems are frequently the last line of defence in serious infections due to multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria, but their use is threatened by the growing prevalence of carbapenemase-producing pathogens. Ceftazidime-avibactam is a potential new agent for use in such infections. We aimed to assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of ceftazidime-avibactam compared with best available therapy in patients with complicated urinary tract infection or complicated intra-abdominal infection due to ceftazidime-resistant Gram-negative pathogens. Methods REPRISE was a pathogen-directed, international, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial that recruited patients from hospitals across 16 countries worldwide. Eligible patients were aged 18–90 years with complicated urinary tract infection or complicated intra-abdominal infection caused by ceftazidime-resistant Enterobacteriaceae or Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Patients were randomised (1:1) to 5–21 days of treatment with either ceftazidime-avibactam (a combination of 2000 mg ceftazidime plus 500 mg avibactam, administered via a 2-h intravenous infusion every 8 h) or best available therapy. The primary endpoint was clinical response at the test-of-cure visit, 7–10 days after last infusion of study therapy, analysed in all patients who had at least one ceftazidime-resistant Gram-negative pathogen, as confirmed by the central laboratory, and who received at least one dose of study drug. Safety endpoints were assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01644643. Findings Between Jan 7, 2013, and Aug 29, 2014, 333 patients were randomly assigned, 165 to ceftazidime-avibactam and 168 to best available therapy. Of these, 154 assigned to ceftazidime-avibactam (144 with complicated urinary tract infection and ten with complicated intra-abdominal infection) and 148 assigned to best available therapy (137 with complicated urinary tract infection and 11 with complicated intra-abdominal infection) were analysed for the primary outcome. 163 (97%) of 168 patients in the best available therapy group received a carbapenem, 161 (96%) as monotherapy. The overall proportions of patients with a clinical cure at the test-of-cure visit were similar with ceftazidime-avibactam (140 [91%; 95% CI 85·6–94·7] of 154 patients) and best available therapy (135 [91%; 85·9–95·0] of 148 patients). 51 (31%) of 164 patients in the ceftazidime-avibactam group and 66 (39%) of 168 in the best available therapy group had an adverse event, most of which were mild or moderate in intensity. Gastrointestinal disorders were the most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events with both ceftazidime-avibactam (21 [13%] of 164 patients) and best available therapy (30 [18%] of 168 patients). No new safety concerns were identified for ceftazidime-avibactam. Interpretation These results provide evidence of the efficacy of ceftazidime-avibactam as a potential alternative to carbapenems in patients with ceftazidime-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and P aeruginosa. Funding AstraZeneca

A randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study comparing the efficacy and safety of ceftazidime/avibactam plus metronidazole versus meropenem for complicated intra-abdominal infections in hospitalised adults in Asia

Ceftazidime/avibactam comprises the broad-spectrum cephalosporin ceftazidime and the non-β-lactam β-lactamase inhibitor avibactam. This phase 3, randomised, double-blind study (NCT01726023) assessed the efficacy and safety of ceftazidime/avibactam plus metronidazole compared with meropenem in patients with complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) in Asian countries. Subjects aged 18–90 years and hospitalised with cIAI requiring surgical intervention were randomised 1:1 to receive every 8 h either: ceftazidime/avibactam (2000/500 mg, 2-h infusion) followed by metronidazole (500 mg, 60-min infusion); or meropenem (1000 mg, 30-min infusion). Non-inferiority of ceftazidime/avibactam plus metronidazole to meropenem was concluded if the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the between-group difference in clinical cure rate was greater than −12.5% at the test-of-cure (TOC) visit (28–35 days after randomisation) in the clinically evaluable (CE) population. Safety was also evaluated. Of 441 subjects randomised, 432 received at least one dose of study medication (ceftazidime/avibactam plus metronidazole, n = 215; meropenem, n = 217). In the CE population at the TOC visit, non-inferiority of ceftazidime/avibactam plus metronidazole to meropenem was demonstrated, with clinical cure reported for 93.8% (166/177) and 94.0% (173/184) of subjects, respectively (between-group difference, −0.2, 95% CI −5.53 to 4.97). The clinical cure rate with ceftazidime/avibactam plus metronidazole was comparable in subjects with ceftazidime-non-susceptible and ceftazidime-susceptible isolates (95.7% vs. 92.1%, respectively). Adverse events were similar between the study groups. Ceftazidime/avibactam plus metronidazole was non-inferior to meropenem in the treatment of cIAIs in Asian populations and was effective against ceftazidime-non-susceptible pathogens. No new safety concerns were identified

Efficacy of ceftazidime-avibactam in a rat intra-abdominal abscess model against a ceftazidime- and meropenem-resistant isolate of Klebsiella pneumoniae carrying blaKPC-2

Efficacies of ceftazidime-avibactam (4:1 w/w) and ceftazidime were tested against ceftazidime-susceptible (blaKPC-2-negative), and meropenem- and ceftazidime-resistant (blaKPC-2-positive), Klebsiella pneumoniae in a 52-h, multiple dose, abdominal abscess model in the rat. Efficacies corresponded to minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) measured in vitro and were consistent with drug exposures modelled from pharmacokinetics in infected animals. The ceftazidime, ceftazidime-avibactam and meropenem control treatments were effective in the rat abscess model against the susceptible strain, whereas only ceftazidime-avibactam was effective against K. pneumoniae harbouring blaKPC-2

Ceftazidime-avibactam versus meropenem in nosocomial pneumonia, including ventilator-associated pneumonia (REPROVE): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 non-inferiority trial

Background: Nosocomial pneumonia is commonly associated with antimicrobial-resistant Gram-negative pathogens. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ceftazidime-avibactam in patients with nosocomial pneumonia, including ventilator-associated pneumonia, compared with meropenem in a multinational, phase 3, double-blind, non-inferiority trial (REPROVE). Methods: Adults with nosocomial pneumonia (including ventilator-associated pneumonia), enrolled at 136 centres in 23 countries, were randomly assigned (1:1) to 2000 mg ceftazidime and 500 mg avibactam (by 2 h intravenous infusion every 8 h) or 1000 mg meropenem (by 30-min intravenous infusion every 8 h) for 7-14 days; regimens were adjusted for renal function. Computer-generated randomisation codes were stratified by infection type and geographical region with a block size of four. Participants and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was clinical cure at the test-of-cure visit (21-25 days after randomisation). Non-inferiority was concluded if the lower limit of the two-sided 95% CI for the treatment difference was greater than -12·5% in the coprimary clinically modified intention-to-treat and clinically evaluable populations. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01808092) and EudraCT (2012-004006-96). Findings: Between April 13, 2013, and Dec 11, 2015, 879 patients were randomly assigned. 808 patients were included in the safety population, 726 were included in the clinically modified intention-to-treat population, and 527 were included in the clinically evaluable population. Predominant Gram-negative baseline pathogens in the microbiologically modified intention-to-treat population (n=355) were Klebsiella pneumoniae (37%) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (30%); 28% were ceftazidime-non-susceptible. In the clinically modified intention-to-treat population, 245 (68·8%) of 356 patients in the ceftazidime-avibactam group were clinically cured, compared with 270 (73·0%) of 370 patients in the meropenem group (difference -4·2% [95% CI -10·8 to 2·5] ). In the clinically evaluable population, 199 (77·4%) of 257 participants were clinically cured in the ceftazidime-avibactam group, compared with 211 (78·1%) of 270 in the meropenem group (difference -0·7% [95% CI -7·9 to 6·4]). Adverse events occurred in 302 (75%) of 405 patients in the ceftazidime-avibactam group versus 299 (74%) of 403 in the meropenem group (safety population), and were mostly mild or moderate in intensity and unrelated to study treatment. Serious adverse events occurred in 75 (19%) patients in the ceftazidime-avibactam group and 54 (13%) patients in the meropenem group. Four serious adverse events (all in the ceftazidime-avibactam group) were judged to be treatment related. Interpretation: Ceftazidime-avibactam was non-inferior to meropenem in the treatment of nosocomial pneumonia. These results support a role for ceftazidime-avibactam as a potential alternative to carbapenems in patients with nosocomial pneumonia (including ventilator-associated pneumonia) caused by Gram-negative pathogens. Funding: AstraZeneca

Identification of cardiac MRI thresholds for risk stratification in pulmonary arterial hypertension

Rationale: Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a life-shortening condition. The European Society of Cardiology and European Respiratory Society and the REVEAL (North American Registry to Evaluate Early and Long-Term PAH Disease Management) risk score calculator (REVEAL 2.0) identify thresholds to predict 1-year mortality. Objectives: This study evaluates whether cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) thresholds can be identified and used to aid risk stratification and facilitate decision-making. Methods: Consecutive patients with PAH (n = 438) undergoing cardiac MRI were identified from the ASPIRE (Assessing the Spectrum of Pulmonary Hypertension Identified at a Referral Center) MRI database. Thresholds were identified from a discovery cohort and evaluated in a test cohort. Measurements and Main Results: A percentage-predicted right ventricular end-systolic volume index threshold of 227% or a left ventricular end-diastolic volume index of 58 ml/m2 identified patients at low (10%) risk of 1-year mortality. These metrics respectively identified 63% and 34% of patients as low risk. Right ventricular ejection fraction >54%, 37–54%, and <37% identified 21%, 43%, and 36% of patients at low, intermediate, and high risk, respectively, of 1-year mortality. At follow-up cardiac MRI, patients who improved to or were maintained in a low-risk group had a 1-year mortality <5%. Percentage-predicted right ventricular end-systolic volume index independently predicted outcome and, when used in conjunction with the REVEAL 2.0 risk score calculator or a modified French Pulmonary Hypertension Registry approach, improved risk stratification for 1-year mortality. Conclusions: Cardiac MRI can be used to risk stratify patients with PAH using a threshold approach. Percentage-predicted right ventricular end-systolic volume index can identify a high percentage of patients at low-risk of 1-year mortality and, when used in conjunction with current risk stratification approaches, can improve risk stratification. This study supports further evaluation of cardiac MRI in risk stratification in PAH

Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation as a first-line disease-modifying therapy in patients with ‘aggressive’ multiple sclerosis

Background: Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT) is an effective treatment for patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) who have highly active disease, despite the use of standard disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). However, the optimal time for offering AHSCT to patients with ‘aggressive’ MS is yet to be established. Objectives: The objective was to explore the safety and efficacy of AHSCT as a first-line DMT in patients with ‘aggressive’ MS. Methods: All patients with ‘aggressive’ MS who received AHSCT as a first-line DMT in five European and North American centres were retrospectively evaluated. Results: Twenty patients were identified. The median interval between diagnosis and AHSCT was 5 (1–20) months. All had multiple poor prognostic markers with a median pre-transplant Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score of 5.0 (1.5–9.5). After a median follow-up of 30 (12–118) months, the median EDSS score improved to 2.0 (0–6.5, p < 0.0001). No patient had further relapses. Three had residual magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) disease activities in the first 6 months post-transplant, but no further new or enhancing lesions were observed in subsequent scans. Conclusion: AHSCT is safe and effective as a first-line DMT in inducing rapid and sustained remission in patients with ‘aggressive’ MS

Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation with upper limb repetitive task practice may improve sensory recovery in chronic stroke

Background: Sensory impairment is associated with reduced functional recovery in stroke survivors. Invasive vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) paired with rehabilitative interventions improves motor recovery in chronic stroke. Noninvasive approaches, for example, transcutaneous auricular VNS (taVNS) are safe, well-tolerated and may also improve motor function in those with residual weakness. We report the impact of taVNS paired with a motor intervention, repetitive task practice, on sensory recovery in a cohort of patients with chronic stroke. Methods: Twelve participants who were more than 3 months postischemic stroke with residual upper limb weakness received 18 × 1 hour sessions over 6 weeks with an average of at least 300 repetitions of functional arm movements per session concurrently with taVNS at maximum tolerated intensity. Light touch and proprioception were scored as part of the Upper Limb Fugl-Meyer (UFM) assessment at baseline and postintervention (score range for sensation 0-12). Results: Eleven participants (92%) had sensory impairment at baseline of whom 7 (64%) regained some sensation (proprioception n = 6 participants, light touch n = 2, both modalities n = 1) postintervention. The maximal increase in UFM sensation score (3 points) was seen in the patient with the greatest improvement in motor function. Conclusions: taVNS paired with motor rehabilitation may improve sensory recovery in chronic stroke patients. The relative contribution of motor and sensory rehabilitation to overall functional recovery in chronic stroke needs further characterization in a larger, phase 2 study

On Bayes inference for a bathtub failure rate via S-paths

10.1007/s10463-009-0253-1Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics634827-850AISX