39 research outputs found

    Effect of a 180 mg ticagrelor loading dose on myocardial necrosis in patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention: A preliminary study

    Get PDF
    Background: To examine whether a loading dose of ticagrelor on top of clopidogrel reduced postpercutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) myonecrosis. Methods: Seventy seven coronary artery disease patients received a loading dose of 300 mg clopidogrel pre-PCI and were divided into three groups: group TT (n = 36): a loading dose of 180 mg ticagrelor pre-PCI, followed by ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily commencing one day post-PCI; group CT (n = 26): a maintenance dose of ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily; group CC (n = 15): clopidogrel 75 mg daily post- PCI. High sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) and creatine kinase-MB (CK-MB) were measured pre-PCI and 0 h, 2 h or 24 h post-PCI. Platelet aggregation was measured in a separate cohort of 54 coronary artery disease patients (35 diabetic and 19 non-diabetic patients). Results: There were no significant differences in hs-cTnT and CK-MB concentration among the three groups. In group TT, diabetic patients had significant higher Δhs-cTnT2h–0h than non-diabetic patients. In the second cohort, although baseline platelet aggregation was higher in diabetic than non-diabetic patients, platelet aggregation was comparable between diabetic and non-diabetic patients at 0 and 2 h post-PCI. Conclusions: This study indicates that a loading dose of ticagrelor does not significantly reduce post- PCI myonecrosis. Diabetes is associated with more post-PCI myonecrosis. A loading dose of ticagrelor effectively reduces platelet aggregation in diabetic patients.

    Considerations for Master Protocols Using External Controls

    Full text link
    There has been an increasing use of master protocols in oncology clinical trials because of its efficiency and flexibility to accelerate cancer drug development. Depending on the study objective and design, a master protocol trial can be a basket trial, an umbrella trial, a platform trial, or any other form of trials in which multiple drugs and/or multiple subpopulations are studied in parallel under a single protocol. External data and evidence (EDE) can be used in the design and analysis of master protocols such as external controls for treatment effect estimation, which can further improve efficiency of the master protocol trial. This paper provides an overview of different types of external controls and their unique features when used in master protocols. Some key considerations in master protocols with external controls are discussed including construction of estimands and assessment of fit-for-use real-world data. A targeted learning-based causal roadmap is presented which constitutes three key steps: (1) define a target statistical estimand that aligns with the causal estimand for the study objective, (2) use an efficient estimator to estimate the target statistical estimand and its uncertainty, and (3) evaluate the impact of causal assumptions on the study conclusion by performing a sensitivity analysis. Two illustrative examples are provided for master protocols using external controls

    Effect of Baseline Subretinal Fluid on Treatment Outcomes in VIVID-DME and VISTA-DME Studies

    Get PDF
    Purpose To evaluate the effect of baseline subretinal fluid (SRF) on treatment outcomes with intravitreal aflibercept injection (IAI) versus laser treatment in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) in the VIVID and VISTA studies. Design Post hoc analysis of 2 randomized controlled trials. Participants Eight hundred seventy-two patients with DME. Methods We randomized patients to receive IAI 2 mg every 4 weeks (2q4), IAI 2 mg every 8 weeks after 5 monthly doses (2q8), or laser. Main Outcome Measures Effect of presence or absence of baseline SRF on visual outcomes in the integrated dataset at weeks 52 and 100. Results Mean best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) gains in the 2q4, 2q8, and laser arms at week 52 were +14.5, +11.0, and –2.3 letters, respectively, (those with baseline SRF) and +10.3, +10.6, and +2.5 letters, respectively, (those without). At week 100, mean gains were +13.5, +10.9, and −2.3 letters (those with baseline SRF) and +10.6, +10.0, and +2.7 letters (those without). The treatment effect for IAI versus laser from baseline to week 52 of 100 was greater for patients with baseline SRF versus those without (nominal P Conclusions This post hoc analysis demonstrated the visual outcome benefits of IAI over laser, regardless of baseline SRF status. A greater treatment effect of IAI was observed in patients with baseline SRF versus those without; however, no meaningful impact of baseline SRF status on treatment outcomes with IAI was demonstrated, indicating that the differential effects of laser might have been the driving force behind the different treatment outcomes in both groups

    Does Screening in the Emergency Department Hurt or Help Victims of Intimate Partner Violence?

    Get PDF
    Study objective: Recent systematic reviews have noted a lack of evidence that screening for intimate partner violence does more good than harm. We assess whether patients screened for intimate partner violence on a computer kiosk in the emergency department (ED) experienced any adverse events during or subsequent to the ED visit and whether computer kiosk identification and referral of intimate partner violence in the ED setting resulted in safety behaviors or contact with referrals. Methods: We conducted a prospective, observational study in which a convenience sample of male and female ED patients triaged to the waiting room who screened positive (on a computer kiosk-based questionnaire) for intimate partner violence in the past year were provided with resources and information and invited to participate in a series of follow-up interviews. At 1-week and 3-month follow-up visits, we assessed intimate partner violence, safety issues, and use of resources. In addition, to obtain an objective measure of safety, we assessed the number of violence-related 911 calls to participant addresses within a call district 6 months before and 6 months after the index ED visit. Results: Of the 2,134 participants in a relationship in the last year, 548 (25.7%) screened positive for intimate partner violence. No safety issues, such as calling security or a partner’s interference with the screening, occurred during the ED visit for any patient who disclosed intimate partner violence. Of the 216 intimate partner violence victims interviewed in person and 65 contacted by telephone 1 week later, no intimate partner violence victims reported any injuries or increased intimate partner violence resulting from participating in the study. For the sample in the local police district, there was no increase in the number of intimate partner violence victims who called 911 in the 6 months after the ED visit. Finally, 35% (n131) reported they had contacted community resources during the 3-month follow-up period. Conclusion: Among patients screening positive for intimate partner violence, there were no identified adverse events related to screening, and many had contacted community resources

    Evaluating the Impact of Intravitreal Aflibercept on Diabetic Retinopathy Progression in the VIVID-DME and VISTA-DME Studies

    Get PDF
    Purpose To evaluate the impact of intravitreal aflibercept (EYLEA, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Tarrytown, NY) versus laser on progression of diabetic retinopathy (DR) severity in Intravitreal Aflibercept Injection in Vision Impairment due to DME (VIVID-DME) and Study of Intravitreal Aflibercept Injection in Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema (VISTA-DME). Design Secondary and exploratory analyses of 2 phase 3, randomized, controlled studies. Participants All patients with a baseline Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) score based on fundus photograph (full analysis), patients who progressed to proliferative DR (PDR) (safety analysis) in VIVID-DME (n = 403) and VISTA-DME (n = 459), or both. Methods We randomized patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) to intravitreal aflibercept 2 mg every 4 weeks (2q4), intravitreal aflibercept 2 mg every 8 weeks after 5 initial monthly doses (2q8), or macular laser photocoagulation at baseline and sham injections at every visit. Main Outcome Measures Proportions of patients with 2-step or more and 3-step or more improvements from baseline in DRSS score, who progressed to PDR, and who underwent panretinal photocoagulation (PRP). Results Among patients with an assessable baseline DRSS score, most showed moderately severe or severe nonproliferative DR. The proportions of patients treated with 2q4, 2q8, and laser with a 2-step or more improvement in DRSS score at week 100 were 29.3%, 32.6%, and 8.2%, respectively, in VIVID-DME and 37.0%, 37.1%, and 15.6%, respectively, in VISTA-DME; the proportions with a 3-step or more improvement in DRSS score were 7.3%, 2.3%, and 0%, respectively, and 22.7%, 19.9%, and 5.2%, respectively. Fewer patients in the 2q4 and 2q8 groups versus the laser group progressed to PDR at week 100 in VISTA-DME (1.5% and 2.2% vs. 5.3%) and VIVID-DME (3.2% and 2.0% vs. 12.3%). The proportions of patients who underwent PRP were 2.9%, 0.7%, and 4.5%, respectively, in VIVID-DME and 1.9%, 0.7%, and 5.2%, respectively, in VISTA-DME. The most frequent serious ocular adverse event at week 100 was cataract (pooled intravitreal aflibercept, 1.7% of patients; laser, 3.5% of patients). Conclusions These analyses demonstrate the benefit of intravitreal aflibercept over laser with respect to DR progression, suggesting a benefit on DME, and on underlying DR

    FORT-1: Phase II/III Study of Rogaratinib Versus Chemotherapy in Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma Selected Based on FGFR1/3 mRNA Expression

    Full text link
    Purpose: Rogaratinib, an oral pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR1-4) inhibitor, showed promising phase I efficacy and safety in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) with FGFR1-3 mRNA overexpression. We assessed rogaratinib efficacy and safety versus chemotherapy in patients with FGFR mRNA-positive advanced/metastatic UC previously treated with platinum chemotherapy. Methods: FORT-1 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03410693) was a phase II/III, randomized, open-label trial. Patients with FGFR1/3 mRNA-positive locally advanced or metastatic UC with ≥ 1 prior platinum-containing regimen were randomly assigned (1:1) to rogaratinib (800 mg orally twice daily, 3-week cycles; n = 87) or chemotherapy (docetaxel 75 mg/m2, paclitaxel 175 mg/m2, or vinflunine 320 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks; n = 88). The primary end point was overall survival, with objective response rate (ORR) analysis planned following phase II accrual. Because of comparable efficacy between treatments, enrollment was stopped before progression to phase III; a full interim analysis of phase II was completed. Results: ORRs were 20.7% (rogaratinib, 18/87; 95% CI, 12.7 to 30.7) and 19.3% (chemotherapy, 17/88; 95% CI, 11.7 to 29.1). Median overall survival was 8.3 months (95% CI, 6.5 to not estimable) and 9.8 months (95% CI, 6.8 to not estimable; hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.72; P = .67). Grade 3/4 events occurred in 37 (43.0%)/4 (4.7%) patients and 32 (39.0%)/15 (18.3%), respectively. No rogaratinib-related deaths occurred. Exploratory analysis of patients with FGFR3 DNA alterations showed ORRs of 52.4% (11/21; 95% CI, 29.8 to 74.3) for rogaratinib and 26.7% (4/15; 95% CI, 7.8 to 55.1) for chemotherapy. Conclusion: To our knowledge, these are the first data to compare FGFR-directed therapy with chemotherapy in patients with FGFR-altered UC, showing comparable efficacy and manageable safety. Exploratory testing suggested FGFR3 DNA alterations in association with FGFR1/3 mRNA overexpression may be better predictors of rogaratinib response

    Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of Raltegravir in a Diverse Cohort of HIV-Infected Patients: 48-Week Results from the REALMRK Study

    Get PDF
    The racial diversity and gender distribution of HIV-infected patients make it essential to confirm the safety and efficacy of raltegravir in these populations. A multicenter, open-label, single-arm observational study was conducted in a diverse cohort of HIV-infected patients (goals: ≥25% women; ≥50% blacks in the United States), enrolling treatment-experienced patients failing or intolerant to current antiretroviral therapy (ART) and treatment-naive patients (limited to ≤20%). All patients received raltegravir 400 mg b.i.d. in a combination antiretroviral regimen for up to 48 weeks. A total of 206 patients received study treatment at 34 sites in the United States, Brazil, Dominican Republic, Jamaica, and South Africa: 97 (47%) were female and 153 (74%) were black [116 (56%) in the United States]. Of these, 185 patients were treatment experienced: 97 (47%) were failing and 88 (43%) were intolerant to current therapy; 21 patients (10%) were treatment naive. Among treatment-intolerant patients, 55 (63%) had HIV-1 RNA<50 copies/ml at baseline. Overall, 15% of patients discontinued: 13% of men, 18% of women, 14% of blacks, and 17% of nonblacks. At week 48, HIV RNA was <50 copies/ml in 60/94 (64%) patients failing prior therapy, 61/80 (76%) patients intolerant to prior therapy, and 16/21 (76%) treatment-naive patients. Response rates were similar for men vs. women and black vs. nonblack patients. Drug-related clinical adverse events were reported by 8% of men, 18% of women, 14% of blacks, and 9% of nonblacks. After 48 weeks of treatment in a diverse cohort of HIV-infected patients, raltegravir was generally safe and well tolerated with potent efficacy regardless of gender or race
    corecore