Imatinib administration in two patients with liver metastases from GIST and severe jaundice

Imatinib is the only effective and approved systemic therapy for the treatment of patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs). Although metastases from GISTs most commonly involve the liver, yielding hyperbilirubinaemia, very few data on imatinib administration in subjects with jaundice are available. We provide evidence that imatinib tolerability was not adversely affected by jaundice in two patients with advanced GIST

Intranasal fentanyl versus fentanyl pectin nasal spray for the management of breakthrough cancer pain in doses proportional to basal opioid regimen.

Abstract The aim of this randomized, crossover, comparison study was to assess the analgesic and adverse effects of 2 nasal preparations, intranasal fentanyl (INFS) and fentanyl pectin nasal spray (FPNS), for breakthrough pain, given in doses proportional to opioid basal regimen. Each patient randomly received INFS or FPNS in doses proportional to opioid dosages used for background analgesia for 2 pairs of episodes. For each episode of breakthrough pain, pain intensity and adverse effects intensity were recorded just before starting the INFS or FPNS (T0) and 5 minutes (T5), 10 minutes (T10), and 20 minutes (T20) after the administration of the nasal drugs. Sixty-nine patients were studied. The mean age was 63.4 years, and 37 patients were males. For the present analysis, 188 episodes were considered. A statistical decrease in pain intensity was observed with both nasal drugs after 5, 10, and 20 minutes. A decrease in pain intensity of >33% was observed in 16, 102, and 159 treated episodes at T5, T10, and T20, respectively. Adverse effects were of mild nature in most cases or were preexistent because of basal opioid therapy. No differences were found in summed pain intensity difference 20 minutes after dosing. Most of patients did not find substantial preferences. INFS and FPNS were effective and well-tolerated treatments for breakthrough pain management. Both delivery systems, in doses proportional to the basal opioid regimen, provided significant analgesia within 10 minutes, without producing relevant adverse effects. PERSPECTIVE: This article showed that INFS and FPNS in doses proportional to basal opioid regimen are equally safe and effective for the management of breakthrough pain in cancer patients. These data provide new insights on the use of nasal preparations of fentanyl

Inhaled corticosteroids versus long-acting beta -agonists for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (Review).

Long-acting beta(2)-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids can be used as maintenance therapy by patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. These interventions are often taken together in a combination inhaler. However, the relative added value of the two individual components is unclear

Effective nebulization of interferon-γ using a novel vibrating mesh.

BACKGROUND: Interferon gamma (IFN-γ) is a clinically relevant immunomodulatory cytokine that has demonstrated significant potential in the treatment and management of respiratory diseases such as tuberculosis and pulmonary fibrosis. As with all large biomolecules, clinical translation is dependent on effective delivery to the disease site and delivery of IFN-γ as an aerosol offers a logical means of drug targeting. Effective localization is often hampered by instability and a lack of safe and efficient delivery systems. The present study sought to determine how effectively IFN-γ can be nebulized using two types of vibrating mesh nebulizer, each with differing mesh architectures, and to investigate the comparative efficiency of delivery of therapeutically active IFN-γ to the lungs. METHODS: Nebulization of IFN-γ was carried out using two different Aerogen vibrating mesh technologies with differing mesh architectures. These technologies represent both a standard commercially available mesh type (Aerogen Solo®) and a new iteration mesh (Photo-defined aperture plate (PDAP®). Extensive aerosol studies (aerosol output and droplet analysis, non-invasive and invasive aerosol therapy) were conducted in line with regulatory requirements and characterization of the stability and bioactivity of the IFN-γ post-nebulization was confirmed using SDS-PAGE and stimulation of Human C-X-C motif chemokine 10 (CXCL 10) also known as IFN-γ-induced protein 10KDa (IP 10) expression from THP-1 derived macrophages (THP-1 cells). RESULTS: Aerosol characterization studies indicated that a significant and reproducible dose of aerosolized IFN-γ can be delivered using both vibrating mesh technologies. Nebulization using both devices resulted in an emitted dose of at least 93% (100% dose minus residual volume) for IFN-γ. Characterization of aerosolized IFN-γ indicated that the PDAP was capable of generating droplets with a significantly lower mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD) with values of 2.79 ± 0.29 μm and 4.39 ± 0.25 μm for the PDAP and Solo respectively. The volume median diameters (VMD) of aerosolized IFN-γ corroborated this with VMDs of 2.33 ± 0.02 μm for the PDAP and 4.30 ± 0.02 μm for the Solo. SDS-PAGE gels indicated that IFN-γ remains stable after nebulization by both devices and this was confirmed by bioactivity studies using a THP-1 cell model in which an alveolar macrophage response to IFN-γ was determined. IFN-γ nebulized by the PDAP and Solo devices had no significant effect on the key inflammatory biomarker cytokine IP-10 release from this model in comparison to non-nebulized controls. Here we demonstrate that it is possible to combine IFN-γ with vibrating mesh nebulizer devices and facilitate effective aerosolisation with minimal impact on IFN-γ structure or bioactivity. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to nebulize IFN-γ effectively with vibrating mesh nebulizer devices without compromising its stability. The PDAP allows for generation of IFN-γ aerosols with improved aerodynamic properties thereby increasing its potential efficiency for lower respiratory tract deposition over current technology, whilst maintaining the integrity and bioactivity of IFN-γ. This delivery modality therefore offers a rational means of facilitating the clinical translation of inhaled IFN-γ

Towards a rational design of solid drug nanoparticles with optimised pharmacological properties.

Solid drug nanoparticles (SDNs) are a nanotechnology with favourable characteristics to enhance drug delivery and improve the treatment of several diseases, showing benefit for improved oral bioavailability and injectable long-acting medicines. The physicochemical properties and composition of nanoformulations can influence the absorption, distribution, and elimination of nanoparticles; consequently, the development of nanoparticles for drug delivery should consider the potential role of nanoparticle characteristics in the definition of pharmacokinetics. The aim of this study was to investigate the pharmacological behaviour of efavirenz SDNs and the identification of optimal nanoparticle properties and composition. Seventy-seven efavirenz SDNs were included in the analysis. Cellular accumulation was evaluated in HepG2 (hepatic) and Caco-2 (intestinal), CEM (lymphocyte), THP1 (monocyte), and A-THP1 (macrophage) cell lines. Apparent intestinal permeability (Papp) was measured using a monolayer of Caco-2 cells. The Papp values were used to evaluate the potential benefit on pharmacokinetics using a physiologically based pharmacokinetic model. The generated SDNs had an enhanced intestinal permeability and accumulation in different cell lines compared to the traditional formulation of efavirenz. Nanoparticle size and excipient choice influenced efavirenz apparent permeability and cellular accumulation, and this appeared to be cell line dependent. These findings represent a valuable platform for the design of SDNs, giving an empirical background for the selection of optimal nanoparticle characteristics and composition. Understanding how nanoparticle components and physicochemical properties influence pharmacological patterns will enable the rational design of SDNs with desirable pharmacokinetics

International Veterinary Epilepsy Task Force consensus proposal: Medical treatment of canine epilepsy in Europe

In Europe, the number of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) licensed for dogs has grown considerably over the last years. Nevertheless, the same questions remain, which include, 1) when to start treatment, 2) which drug is best used initially, 3) which adjunctive AED can be advised if treatment with the initial drug is unsatisfactory, and 4) when treatment changes should be considered. In this consensus proposal, an overview is given on the aim of AED treatment, when to start long-term treatment in canine epilepsy and which veterinary AEDs are currently in use for dogs. The consensus proposal for drug treatment protocols, 1) is based on current published evidence-based literature, 2) considers the current legal framework of the cascade regulation for the prescription of veterinary drugs in Europe, and 3) reflects the authors’ experience. With this paper it is aimed to provide a consensus for the management of canine idiopathic epilepsy. Furthermore, for the management of structural epilepsy AEDs are inevitable in addition to treating the underlying cause, if possible

Open questions and misconceptions in the diagnosis and management of anemia in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding

Despite high prevalence of iron deficiency anemia (IDA) in patients with acute or chronic gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), IDA and iron deficiency (ID) are frequently untreated. Reasons may be misconceptions about the impact and diagnosis of IDA and the efficacy of new treatments. Addressing these misconceptions, this article summarizes current evidence for better understanding and management of GIB-associated IDA. Despite only few controlled studies evaluated the efficacy of iron treatment in patients with GIB, there is consistent evidence suggesting that: (a) IDA should be diligently investigated, (b) effective treatment of ID/IDA improves outcomes such as health-related quality of life and can avoid severe cardiovascular consequences, and (c) intravenous iron should be considered as well-tolerated treatment in this setting. Overall, the misconceptions and practices outlined in this article should be replaced with strategies that are more in line with current guidelines and best practice in GIB and other underlying conditions of ID/IDA.A pesar de la alta prevalencia de anemia por déficit de hierro (ADH) en pacientes con hemorragia digestiva (HD) aguda o crónica, la ADH y el déficit de hierro (DH) son frecuentemente infratratados. Diversos conceptos erróneos sobre el impacto, el diagnóstico y la eficacia de los nuevos tratamientos de la ADH probablemente lo justifican. Para abordar estos errores conceptuales, este artículo resume la evidencia actual para una mejor comprensión y manejo de la ADH. A pesar de que existen pocos estudios controlados que hayan evaluado la eficacia del tratamiento con hierro en pacientes con HD, hay evidencia que sugiere que: (a) la ADH debe ser investigada diligentemente; (b) el tratamiento eficaz del DH/ADH mejora la calidad de vida relacionada con la salud y puede evitar relevantes complicaciones cardiovasculares, y (c) el hierro intravenoso debe ser considerado como un tratamiento bien tolerado en este contexto. En general, los conceptos erróneos y las prácticas inadecuadas descritas en este artículo deben ser reemplazados por estrategias que estén más en línea con las directrices actuales y buenas prácticas clínicas en HD y otras condiciones causantes del DH/ADHinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Regular treatment with formoterol and an inhaled corticosteroid versus regular treatment with salmeterol and an inhaled corticosteroid for chronic asthma: serious adverse events.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is characterised by chronic inflammation of the airways and recurrent exacerbations with wheezing, chest tightness, and cough. Treatment with inhaled steroids and bronchodilators can result in good control of symptoms, prevention of further morbidity, and improved quality of life. However, an increase in serious adverse events with the use of both regular formoterol and regular salmeterol (long-acting beta₂-agonists) compared with placebo for chronic asthma has been demonstrated in previous Cochrane Reviews. This increase was statistically significant in trials that did not randomise participants to an inhaled corticosteroid, but not when formoterol or salmeterol was combined with an inhaled corticosteroid. The confidence intervals were found to be too wide to ensure that the addition of an inhaled corticosteroid renders regular long-acting beta₂-agonists completely safe; few participants and insufficient serious adverse events in these trials precluded a definitive decision about the safety of combination treatments. OBJECTIVES: To assess risks of mortality and non-fatal serious adverse events in trials that have randomised patients with chronic asthma to regular formoterol and an inhaled corticosteroid versus regular salmeterol and an inhaled corticosteroid. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Airways Register of Trials, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trial registries to identify reports of randomised trials for inclusion. We checked manufacturers' websites and clinical trial registers for unpublished trial data, as well as Food and Drug Administration (FDA) submissions in relation to formoterol and salmeterol. The date of the most recent search was  24 February 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included controlled clinical trials with a parallel design, recruiting patients of any age and severity of asthma, if they randomised patients to treatment with regular formoterol versus regular salmeterol (each with a randomised inhaled corticosteroid) and were of at least 12 weeks' duration. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion in the review, extracted outcome data from published papers and trial registries, and applied GRADE rating for the results. We sought unpublished data on mortality and serious adverse events from study sponsors and authors. The primary outcomes were all cause mortality and non-fatal serious adverse events. We chose not to calculate an average result from all the formulations of formoterol and inhaled steroid, as the doses and delivery devices are too diverse to assume a single class effect. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-one studies in 11,572 adults and adolescents and two studies in 723 children met the eligibility criteria of the review. No data were available for two studies; therefore these were not included in the analysis. Among adult and adolescent studies, seven compared formoterol and budesonide to salmeterol and fluticasone (N = 7764), six compared formoterol and beclomethasone to salmeterol and fluticasone (N = 1923), two compared formoterol and mometasone to salmeterol and fluticasone (N = 1126), two compared formoterol and fluticasone to salmeterol and fluticasone (N = 790), and one compared formoterol and budesonide to salmeterol and budesonide (N = 229). In total, five deaths were reported among adults, none of which was thought to be related to asthma. The certainty of evidence for all-cause mortality was low, as there were not enough deaths to permit any precise conclusions regarding the risk of mortality on combination formoterol versus combination salmeterol. In all, 201 adults reported non-fatal serious adverse events. In studies comparing formoterol and budesonide to salmeterol and fluticasone, there were 77 in the formoterol arm and 68 in the salmeterol arm (Peto odds ratio (OR) 1.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 1.59; 5935 participants, 7 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). In the formoterol and beclomethasone studies, there were 12 adults in the formoterol arm and 13 in the salmeterol arm with events (Peto OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.43 to 2.08; 1941 participants, 6 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). In the formoterol and mometasone studies, there were 18 in the formoterol arm and 11 in the salmeterol arm (Peto OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.20; 1126 participants, 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). One adult in the formoterol and fluticasone studies in the salmeterol arm experienced an event (Peto OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.00 to 3.10; 293 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). Another adult in the formoterol and budesonide compared to salmeterol and budesonide study in the formoterol arm had an event (Peto OR 7.45, 95% CI 0.15 to 375.68; 229 participants, 1 study; low-certainty evidence). Only 46 adults were reported to have experienced asthma-related serious adverse events. The certainty of the evidence was low to very low due to the small number of events and the absence of independent assessment of causation. The two studies in children compared formoterol and fluticasone to salmeterol and fluticasone. No deaths and no asthma-related serious adverse events were reported in these studies. Four all-cause serious adverse events were reported: three in the formoterol arm, and one in the salmeterol arm (Peto OR 2.72, 95% CI 0.38 to 19.46; 548 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, for both adults and children, evidence is insufficient to show whether regular formoterol in combination with budesonide, beclomethasone, fluticasone, or mometasone has a different safety profile from salmeterol in combination with fluticasone or budesonide. Five deaths of any cause were reported across all studies and no deaths from asthma; this information is insufficient to permit any firm conclusions about the relative risks of mortality on combination formoterol in comparison to combination salmeterol inhalers. Evidence on all-cause non-fatal serious adverse events indicates that there is probably little to no difference between formoterol/budesonide and salmeterol/fluticasone inhalers. However events for the other formoterol combination inhalers were too few to allow conclusions. Only 46 non-fatal serious adverse events were thought to be asthma related; this small number in addition to the absence of independent outcome assessment means that we have very low confidence for this outcome. We found no evidence of safety issues that would affect the choice between salmeterol and formoterol combination inhalers used for regular maintenance therapy by adults and children with asthma