Patients’, physicians’, nurses’, and pharmacists’ preferences on the characteristics of biologic agents used in the treatment of rheumatic diseases

Objective: To estimate preferences in relevant treatment characteristics evaluated by different groups involved in the management of patients with rheumatic diseases. Subjects and methods: We surveyed patients with rheumatic diseases, and rheumatologists, nurses, and pharmacists with experience in treatment with/provision of biologic drugs for these patients. Through a discrete choice experiment, participants evaluated 16 possible scenarios in which pairs of similarly efficacious treatments were described with six characteristics: 1) frequency of administration; 2) mode and place of administration; 3) manner, helpfulness, efficiency, and courtesy of health personnel; 4) frequency of reactions at the site of drug administration; 5) severity of generalized undesired/allergic reactions; and 6) additional cost. The direction and strength of preferences toward each characteristic level and the relative importance of each characteristic were estimated through a random-effects conditional logistic regression model. Results: In total, 513 patients, 110 rheumatologists, 51 nurses, and 46 pharmacists from 30 centers in Italy participated. Characteristics 3, 4, and 6 were the most important for every subgroup; 1 was least important for patients and rheumatologists, 2 was least important for pharmacists, and 2 and 5 were least important for nurses. For characteristic 2, pharmacists preferred subcutaneous self-injection with a syringe; nurses preferred assisted infusion at an infusion center close to the patient\u2019s home; patients and rheumatologists preferred subcutaneous self-injection with a pen. Conclusion: The different preferences for some characteristics shown by the different groups can play an important role, together with purely clinical aspects, in the choice and consequent benefit of treatments, contributing also to a more satisfactory use of resources

Gene expression changes in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy skin biopsies.

Chronic-inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) is an immune-mediated disease with no known biomarkers for diagnosing the disease or assessing its prognosis. We performed transcriptional profiling microarray analysis on skin punch biopsies from 20 CIDP patients and 17 healthy controls to identify disease-associated gene expression changes. We demonstrate changes in expression of genes involved in immune and chemokine regulation, growth and repair. We also found a combination of two upregulated genes that can be proposed as a novel biomarker of the disorder

Genome-wide prediction of matrix attachment regions that increase gene expression in mammalian cells.

Gene transfer in eukaryotic cells and organisms suffers from epigenetic effects that result in low or unstable transgene expression and high clonal variability. Use of epigenetic regulators such as matrix attachment regions (MARs) is a promising approach to alleviate such unwanted effects. Dissection of a known MAR allowed the identification of sequence motifs that mediate elevated transgene expression. Bioinformatics analysis implied that these motifs adopt a curved DNA structure that positions nucleosomes and binds specific transcription factors. From these observations, we computed putative MARs from the human genome. Cloning of several predicted MARs indicated that they are much more potent than the previously known element, boosting the expression of recombinant proteins from cultured cells as well as mediating high and sustained expression in mice. Thus we computationally identified potent epigenetic regulators, opening new strategies toward high and stable transgene expression for research, therapeutic production or gene-based therapies

Factors influencing the choice of first- and second-line biologic therapy for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis : real-life data from the Italian LORHEN Registry

According to international recommendations, the selection of the biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (bDMARD) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is mainly left to the clinician\u2019s preference. We analyzed the real-life factors influencing the first-line choice or the switching strategy, focusing on the prescription of abatacept (ABA) or tocilizumab (TCZ) compared to TNF\u3b1 inhibitors (TNFi). Patients enrolled in the Lombardy Rheumatology Network (LORHEN) Registry after January 1, 2010, when all considered bDMARD agents were available, were included. The population was divided into \u201cfirst-\u201d and \u201csecond-line\u201d bDMARD. We included 1910 patients (first line n\ua0=\ua01264, second line n\ua0=\ua0646). Age was higher in ABA or TCZ vs TNFi treated patients (p\ua0<\ua00.0001). Positive latent tuberculosis screening was associated with first-line ABA (p\ua0=\ua00.002). Methotrexate (MTX) combination therapy was lower in the TCZ group (p\ua0=\ua00.02). The type (dyslipidemia, hypertension, pulmonary disease) and the number of comorbidities influenced the choice towards ABA (p\ua0=\ua00.01). Multinomial logistic regression demonstrated that a second-line treatment, higher age, dyslipidemia, pulmonary disease, other comorbidities, and extra-articular RA manifestations were associated with ABA compared to TNFi. TCZ was associated with a second-line treatment, higher age, and more severe disease activity. Stopping the first bDMARD due to adverse events (AE) influenced the choice towards ABA. In real life, higher age and comorbidities influence the choice towards ABA and TCZ compared to TNFi. ABA was preferred in case of suspension of previous treatments due to AE. After failing a first-line TNFi, swapping to a different mechanism of action is more common

10-year stroke prevention after successful carotid endarterectomy for asymptomatic stenosis (ACST-1); a multicentre randomised trial

BACKGROUND: If carotid artery narrowing remains asymptomatic (ie, has caused no recent stroke or other neurological symptoms), successful carotid endarterectomy (CEA) reduces stroke incidence for some years. We assessed the long-term effects of successful CEA. METHODS: Between 1993 and 2003, 3120 asymptomatic patients from 126 centres in 30 countries were allocated equally, by blinded minimised randomisation, to immediate CEA (median delay 1 month, IQR 0·3-2·5) or to indefinite deferral of any carotid procedure, and were followed up until death or for a median among survivors of 9 years (IQR 6-11). The primary outcomes were perioperative mortality and morbidity (death or stroke within 30 days) and non-perioperative stroke. Kaplan-Meier percentages and logrank p values are from intention-to-treat analyses. This study is registered, number ISRCTN26156392. FINDINGS: 1560 patients were allocated immediate CEA versus 1560 allocated deferral of any carotid procedure. The proportions operated on while still asymptomatic were 89·7% versus 4·8% at 1 year (and 92·1%vs 16·5% at 5 years). Perioperative risk of stroke or death within 30 days was 3·0% (95% CI 2·4-3·9; 26 non-disabling strokes plus 34 disabling or fatal perioperative events in 1979 CEAs). Excluding perioperative events and non-stroke mortality, stroke risks (immediate vs deferred CEA) were 4·1% versus 10·0% at 5 years (gain 5·9%, 95% CI 4·0-7·8) and 10·8% versus 16·9% at 10 years (gain 6·1%, 2·7-9·4); ratio of stroke incidence rates 0·54, 95% CI 0·43-0·68, p<0·0001. 62 versus 104 had a disabling or fatal stroke, and 37 versus 84 others had a non-disabling stroke. Combining perioperative events and strokes, net risks were 6·9% versus 10·9% at 5 years (gain 4·1%, 2·0-6·2) and 13·4% versus 17·9% at 10 years (gain 4·6%, 1·2-7·9). Medication was similar in both groups; throughout the study, most were on antithrombotic and antihypertensive therapy. Net benefits were significant both for those on lipid-lowering therapy and for those not, and both for men and for women up to 75 years of age at entry (although not for older patients). INTERPRETATION: Successful CEA for asymptomatic patients younger than 75 years of age reduces 10-year stroke risks. Half this reduction is in disabling or fatal strokes. Net benefit in future patients will depend on their risks from unoperated carotid lesions (which will be reduced by medication), on future surgical risks (which might differ from those in trials), and on whether life expectancy exceeds 10 years. FUNDING: UK Medical Research Council, BUPA Foundation, Stroke Association

Vorapaxar in the secondary prevention of atherothrombotic events

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: Thrombin potently activates platelets through the protease-activated receptor PAR-1. Vorapaxar is a novel antiplatelet agent that selectively inhibits the cellular actions of thrombin through antagonism of PAR-1. METHODS: We randomly assigned 26,449 patients who had a history of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or peripheral arterial disease to receive vorapaxar (2.5 mg daily) or matching placebo and followed them for a median of 30 months. The primary efficacy end point was the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke. After 2 years, the data and safety monitoring board recommended discontinuation of the study treatment in patients with a history of stroke owing to the risk of intracranial hemorrhage. RESULTS: At 3 years, the primary end point had occurred in 1028 patients (9.3%) in the vorapaxar group and in 1176 patients (10.5%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio for the vorapaxar group, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 0.94; P<0.001). Cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or recurrent ischemia leading to revascularization occurred in 1259 patients (11.2%) in the vorapaxar group and 1417 patients (12.4%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.95; P=0.001). Moderate or severe bleeding occurred in 4.2% of patients who received vorapaxar and 2.5% of those who received placebo (hazard ratio, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.43 to 1.93; P<0.001). There was an increase in the rate of intracranial hemorrhage in the vorapaxar group (1.0%, vs. 0.5% in the placebo group; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Inhibition of PAR-1 with vorapaxar reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or ischemic events in patients with stable atherosclerosis who were receiving standard therapy. However, it increased the risk of moderate or severe bleeding, including intracranial hemorrhage. (Funded by Merck; TRA 2P-TIMI 50 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00526474.)