Efficacy and Safety of Mirabegron Add-on Therapy to Solifenacin in Incontinent Overactive Bladder Patients with an Inadequate Response to Initial 4-Week Solifenacin Monotherapy: A Randomised Double-blind Multicentre Phase 3B Study (BESIDE)

AbstractBackgroundIncontinence has a greater detrimental effect on quality of life than other symptoms of overactive bladder (OAB) and is often difficult to treat with antimuscarinic monotherapy.ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and the safety and tolerability of combination (solifenacin 5mg and mirabegron 50mg) versus solifenacin 5 or 10mg in OAB patients remaining incontinent after 4 wk of solifenacin 5mg.Design, setting, and participantsOAB patients remaining incontinent despite daily solifenacin 5mg during 4-wk single-blind run-in were randomised 1:1:1 to double-blind daily combination or solifenacin 5 or 10mg for 12 wk. Patients receiving the combination were initiated on mirabegron 25mg increasing to 50mg after week 4.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisThe primary end point was a change from baseline to end of treatment (EOT) in the mean number of incontinence episodes per 24h (stratified rank analysis of covariance [ANCOVA]). Key secondary end points were a change from baseline to EOT in the mean number of micturitions per 24h (ANCOVA) and number of incontinence episodes noted in a 3-d diary at EOT (mixed-effects Poisson regression). A trial (BESIDE) comparing combination treatment (solifenacin plus mirabegron) with one treatment alone (solifenacin) tested the superiority of combination versus solifenacin 5mg, noninferiority (and potential superiority) of combination versus solifenacin 10mg (key secondary end points), and the safety and tolerability of combination therapy versus solifenacin monotherapy.Results and limitationsA total of 2174 patients were randomised to combination (n=727), solifenacin 5mg (n=728), or solifenacin 10mg (n=719). At EOT, combination was superior to solifenacin 5mg, with significant improvements in daily incontinence (p=0.001), daily micturitions (p<0.001), and incontinence noted in a 3-d diary (p=0.014). Combination was noninferior to solifenacin 10mg for key secondary end points and superior to solifenacin 10mg for improving daily micturitions. All treatments were well tolerated.ConclusionsAdding mirabegron 50mg to solifenacin 5mg further improved OAB symptoms versus solifenacin 5 or 10mg, and it was well tolerated in OAB patients remaining incontinent after initial solifenacin 5mg.Patient summaryIn this 12-wk study, overactive bladder patients who remained incontinent despite initial solifenacin 5mg treatment received additional treatment with mirabegron 50mg. Combining mirabegron 50mg with solifenacin 5mg was superior to solifenacin 5mg alone in improving symptoms of incontinence and frequent urination, and it was well tolerated.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01908829

The Role of Donor Selection for a Second Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation in Patients with AML Relapsing after a First Transplant; A Study on Behalf of the Acute Leukemia Working Party of EBMT

Abstract Introduction. Recurrent disease is the major cause of treatment failure after allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT) in patients with AML. Second SCT (SCT2) is a valid treatment option in this setting but outcome is relatively poor. Haplo-identical (haplo) SCT is increasingly used over the last decade due to the introduction of non T-depleted methods. Prior studies have shown similar outcome when using the same or different HLA-matched donor for SCT2. However, there is relatively limited data on the use of haplo-donors. Methods and Results. The study included 556 patients with AML relapsing after a first allogeneic SCT (SCT1) given in CR1 from an HLA-matched sibling (sib, n= 294) or a matched unrelated donor (MUD, n=262) and given SCT2 during the years 2006-2016. The median age at SCT2 was 46 years (20-73). 247 patients were in CR2 (44%) and 309 had active leukemia (55%) at the time of SCT2. The conditioning regimen was myeloablative (MAC, 66%) or reduced-intensity (RIC, 34%) for SCT1, and 41% and 59%, respectively for SCT2. 19% of all patients had acute GVHD grade II-IV and 20% had chronic GVHD after SCT1 and before relapse. Patients were divided into 3 groups based on the donor selected for SCT2; 1) same donor (n=163, sib/sib-112, MUD/MUD-51), 2) different HLA-matched donor (n=305, sib/different sib-44, sib/MUD-93, MUD/ different MUD- 168), 3) haplo-donor (n=88, sib/haplo-45, MUD/haplo-43). All haploSCT were non T-depleted. There were some differences between the 3 groups in the timing of relapse and SCT2. The median time from SCT1 to relapse was similar; 10.6, 12.5 and 9.3 months, respectively (P=0.14). However, the median time from relapse to SCT2 was shorter for the same donor group; 2.8, 3.7 and 3.5 months, respectively (P<0.001) and the median time between SCT1 and SCT2 was longer for the different donor group; 14.3, 17.5 and 13.8 months, respectively (P=0.03). There were no difference between the groups in patient age, gender, disease status at SCT2 or conditioning regimen intensity for SCT1 or SCT2. The 2-year leukemia-free survival (LFS) after SCT2 was 23.5%, 23.7% and 21.8%, respectively (unadjusted P=0.30). Multivariate analysis of factors predicting relapse after SCT2 showed no effect of the second donor type, hazard ratio (HR) 0.96 (P=0.83) and 1.20 (P=0.47) for different matched donor and haplo-donor compared to the same donor, respectively. MUD donor in SCT1, CR2 compared to active disease and chronic GVHD after SCT1 were associated with reduced relapse risk after SCT2, HR 0.70 (P=0.02), 0.60 (P=0.001) and 0.66 (P=0.03), respectively. Age, gender, conditioning regimen used for SCT1 or SCT2 and time to first relapse or to SCT2 did not predict relapse rate after SCT2. The second donor type did predict for non-relapse mortality (NRM) after SCT2; HR 1.26 (P=0.41) and 2.18 (P=0.02) for different matched donor and haplo-donor compared to same donor, respectively. Advanced age and MAC in SCT1 also predicted for NRM, HR 1.40 (P<0.001) and 0.61 (P=0.04), respectively. The second donor also predicted for LFS after SCT2; HR 1.05 (P=0.77) and 1.55 (P=0.03), respectively. Advanced age and SCT2 in CR2 also predicted for LFS; HR 1.11 (P=0.06) and 0.66 (P=0.002), respectively. In all, there were no differences between same or different matched donors in SCT2 outcomes, but haploSCT2 was associated with higher NRM and lower LFS. Significant interaction was detected between second donor type and conditioning for SCT1. The inferior outcome after SCT2 with a haplo-donor was limited to patients given MAC in SCT1. In this setting it was associated with higher relapse and NRM rates and lower LFS, HR 1.86 (P=0.05), 3.40 (P=0.005) and 2.25 (P=0.001), respectively. However, there was no difference in any of these outcomes in patients given RIC in SCT1. Unadjusted analysis showed that in patients with no chronic GVHD after SCT1, haploSCT2 was associated with lower LFS, due to higher NRM. However, LFS was similar in patients with prior chronic GVHD. Multivariate analysis was not feasible due to low patient numbers. Conclusions. Second SCT with the same donor or different matched donor is associated with similar outcomes in patients with relapsed AML after a first SCT. However, SCT2 with a haplo-donor is associated with higher NRM and lower LFS, mostly in patients given MAC in SCT1. Prior chronic GVHD after SCT1 is associated with lower relapse rate after SCT2. The role of prior chronic GVHD in donor selection should be further investigated. Disclosures Finke: Medac: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel grants, Research Funding; Neovii: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel grants, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel grants, Research Funding; Riemser: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Gramatzki:Affimed: Research Funding. Stelljes:Novartis: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; JAZZ: Honoraria; MSD: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Stoelzel:Neovii: Speakers Bureau. Mohty:MaaT Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria

Can We Identify Sources of Fine Particles Responsible for Exercise-Induced Ischemia on Days with Elevated Air Pollution? The ULTRA Study

Epidemiologic studies have shown that ambient particulate matter (PM) has adverse effects on cardiovascular health. Effective mitigation of the health effects requires identification of the most harmful PM sources. The objective of our study was to evaluate relative effects of fine PM [aerodynamic diameter ≤ 2.5 μm (PM(2.5))] from different sources on exercise-induced ischemia. We collected daily outdoor PM(2.5) samples between autumn 1998 and spring 1999 in Helsinki, Finland. The mass of PM(2.5) was apportioned between five sources. Forty-five elderly nonsmoking persons with stable coronary heart disease visited a clinic biweekly for submaximal exercise testing, during which the occurrence of ST segment depressions was recorded. Levels of PM(2.5) originating from local traffic and long-range transport were associated with ST segment depressions > 0.1 mV, with odds ratios at 2-day lag of 1.53 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.19–1.97] and 1.11 (95% CI, 1.02–1.20) per 1 μg/m(3), respectively. In multipollutant models, where we used indicator elements for sources instead of source-specific PM(2.5), only absorbance (elemental carbon), an indicator of local traffic and other combustion, was associated with ST segment depressions. Our results suggest that the PM fraction originating from combustion processes, notably traffic, exacerbates ischemic heart diseases associated with PM mass

Workgroup Report: Workshop on Source Apportionment of Particulate Matter Health Effects—Intercomparison of Results and Implications

Although the association between exposure to ambient fine particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter < 2.5 μm (PM(2.5)) and human mortality is well established, the most responsible particle types/sources are not yet certain. In May 2003, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Particulate Matter Centers Program sponsored the Workshop on the Source Apportionment of PM Health Effects. The goal was to evaluate the consistency of the various source apportionment methods in assessing source contributions to daily PM(2.5) mass–mortality associations. Seven research institutions, using varying methods, participated in the estimation of source apportionments of PM(2.5) mass samples collected in Washington, DC, and Phoenix, Arizona, USA. Apportionments were evaluated for their respective associations with mortality using Poisson regressions, allowing a comparative assessment of the extent to which variations in the apportionments contributed to variability in the source-specific mortality results. The various research groups generally identified the same major source types, each with similar elemental makeups. Intergroup correlation analyses indicated that soil-, sulfate-, residual oil-, and salt-associated mass were most unambiguously identified by various methods, whereas vegetative burning and traffic were less consistent. Aggregate source-specific mortality relative risk (RR) estimate confidence intervals overlapped each other, but the sulfate-related PM(2.5) component was most consistently significant across analyses in these cities. Analyses indicated that source types were a significant predictor of RR, whereas apportionment group differences were not. Variations in the source apportionments added only some 15% to the mortality regression uncertainties. These results provide supportive evidence that existing PM(2.5) source apportionment methods can be used to derive reliable insights into the source components that contribute to PM(2.5) health effects

Final Evaluation of a Clinical Phase III Trial Comparing Treosulfan to Busulfan-Based Conditioning Therapy Prior to Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation of Adult Acute Myeloid Leukemia and Myelodysplastic Syndrome Patients Ineligible to Standard Myeloablative Regimens

Background Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT) remains a challenge in elderly and comorbid AML and MDS patients. This patient population is at increased risk for non-relapse mortality (NRM) when treated with standard myeloablative conditioning and was selected to compare a newly developed treosulfan-based with a well-established reduced intensity busulfan-based preparative regimen in a prospective randomized clinical phase III trial. Methods Adult patients with AML in remission or MDS scheduled for HCT from matched related or unrelated donors, aged ≥50 years or with a comorbidity index (HCT-CI) of >2 were enrolled by a central stratified randomization procedure. Treatment arms consisted of intravenous (IV) treosulfan (10 g/m²/day [d-4 to d-2]) or IV busulfan (3.2 mg/kg/day [d-4 to d-3]), both combined with IV fludarabine (30 mg/m²/day [d-6 to d-2]). The primary objective was to compare event-free survival (EFS) at two years with relapse/progression of disease, graft failure, or death reported as events. Secondary endpoints were safety evaluation (according to CTCAE v4.03), engraftment, chimerism, overall survival (OS), relapse/progression incidence (RI), NRM and acute or chronic GvHD. After a previously conducted confirmatory interim analysis (based on 476 patients), which resulted in early termination of patient accrual due to significant non-inferiority of treosulfan treatment with improved EFS, NRM and OS (Beelen et al., ASH 2017), results of the final analysis of all 570 randomized patients including post surveillance data are provided here. Results Median age of the 551 patients (352 AML; 199 MDS) included in the full analysis set (268 treosulfan; 283 busulfan) was 60 years (range: 31, 70). Frequencies of early adverse events (d-6 to d+28) and incidences of acute and chronic GvHD were largely comparable between the two regimens, while extensive chronic GvHD was numerically in favor of treosulfan (19.7% vs. 26.7%; p=0.0750). Primary neutrophil recovery at day +28 was comparable, while the rate of complete donor-type chimerism (day +28) was higher after treosulfan (93.2% vs. 83.3%; p Conclusions Final evaluation of this phase III trial substantiates the previous confirmatory analysis resulting in significantly improved survival after treosulfan-based conditioning. Due to the reduction of NRM a major clinical benefit of the new treosulfan conditioning regimen was demonstrated in the selected AML/MDS patient population

New drugs, new toxicities: severe side effects of modern targeted and immunotherapy of cancer and their management

Pharmacological and cellular treatment of cancer is changing dramatically with benefits for patient outcome and comfort, but also with new toxicity profiles. The majority of adverse events can be classified as mild or moderate, but severe and life-threatening complications requiring ICU admission also occur. This review will focus on pathophysiology, symptoms, and management of these events based on the available literature. While standard antineoplastic therapy is associated with immunosuppression and infections, some of the recent approaches induce overwhelming inflammation and autoimmunity. Cytokine-release syndrome (CRS) describes a complex of symptoms including fever, hypotension, and skin reactions as well as lab abnormalities. CRS may occur after the infusion of monoclonal or bispecific antibodies (MABs, BABs) targeting immune effectors and tumor cells and is a major concern in recipients of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) modified T lymphocytes as well. BAB and CAR T-cell treatment may also be compromised by central nervous system (CNS) toxicities such as encephalopathy, cerebellar alteration, disturbed consciousness, or seizures. While CRS is known to be induced by exceedingly high levels of inflammatory cytokines, the pathophysiology of CNS events is still unclear. Treatment with antibodies against inhibiting immune checkpoints can lead to immune-related adverse events (IRAEs); colitis, diarrhea, and endocrine disorders are often the cause for ICU admissions. Respiratory distress is the main reason for ICU treatment in cancer patients and is attributable to infectious agents in most cases. In addition, some of the new drugs are reported to cause non-infectious lung complications. While drug-induced interstitial pneumonitis was observed in a substantial number of patients treated with phosphoinositol-3-kinase inhibitors, IRAEs may also affect the lungs. Inhibitors of angiogenetic pathways have increased the antineoplastic portfolio. However, vessel formation is also essential for regeneration and tissue repair. Therefore, severe vascular side effects, including thromboembolic events, gastrointestinal bleeding or perforation, hypertension, and congestive heart failure, compromise antitumor efficacy. The limited knowledge of the pathophysiology and management of life-threatening complications relating to new cancer drugs presents a need to provide ICU staff, oncologists, and organ specialists with evidence-based algorithms