The unresolved safety concerns of bovine thrombin

A recent review has suggested that bovine thrombin is not associated with an increased risk of bleeding in surgical populations. In spite of extremely limited evidence available, many valuable resources (e.g. safety surveillance and post-marketing programs, case reports) were excluded in reaching this conclusion. While waiting for the adequately powered, controlled clinical trials to address the effects of bovine thrombin on bleeding and thrombotic events, the potential risk cannot be simply ignored. Rather, continued vigilance in the post-surgical setting for bleeding events that may be associated with the development of acquired coagulation factor inhibitors following bovine thrombin administration is warranted

Advances in the treatment of hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis: A review

Introduction: Amyloid transthyretin amyloidosis (ATTR) is a progressive and often fatal disease caused by the buildup of mutated (hereditary ATTR [hATTR]; also known as ATTR variant [ATTRv]) or normal transthyretin (wild-type ATTR) throughout the body. Two new therapies-inotersen, an antisense oligonucleotide therapy, and patisiran, an RNA interference therapy-received marketing authorization and represent a significant advance in the treatment of amyloidosis. Herein, we describe the clinical presentation of ATTR, commonly used procedures in its diagnosis, and current treatment landscape for ATTR, with a focus on hATTR. Methods: A PubMed search from 2008 to September 2018 was conducted to review the literature on ATTR. Results: Until recently, there have been few treatment options for polyneuropathy of hATTR. Inotersen and patisiran substantially reduce the amyloidogenic precursor protein transthyretin and have demonstrated efficacy in patients with early- and late-stage disease and in slowing or improving neuropathy progression. In contrast, established therapies, such as liver transplantation, typically reserved for patients with early-stage disease, and tafamidis, indicated for the treatment of early-stage disease in Europe, or diflunisal, a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug that is used off-label, are associated with side effects and/or unclear efficacy in certain patient populations. Thus, inotersen and patisiran are positioned to be the preferred therapeutic modalities. Conclusions: Important differences between inotersen and patisiran, including formulation, dosing, requirements for premedications, and safety monitoring, require an understanding and knowledge of each treatment for informed decision making.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Biological therapies in the systemic management of psoriasis: International Consensus Conference

Psoriasis is a chronic, immune-mediated disorder that usually requires long-term treatment for control. Approximately 25% of patients have moderate to severe disease and require phototherapy, systemic therapy or both. Despite the availability of numerous therapeutic options, the long-term management of psoriasis can be complicated by treatment-related limitations. With advances in molecular research and technology, several biological therapies are in various stages of development and approval for psoriasis. Biological therapies are designed to modulate key steps in the pathogenesis of psoriasis. Collectively, biologicals have been evaluated in thousands of patients with psoriasis and have demonstrated significant benefit with favourable safety and tolerability profiles. The limitations of current psoriasis therapies, the value of biological therapies for psoriasis, and guidance regarding the incorporation of biological therapies into clinical practice are discussed.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/72815/1/j.1365-2133.2004.06070.x.pd

Clinical epidemiology, treatment and prognostic factors of extensively drug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients

Limited data exist regarding prognostic factors and optimal antimicrobial treatment of infections caused by extensively drug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (XDR-AB). This retrospective cohort study included 93 adult patients who developed ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) due to XDR-AB in the ICU of the University Hospital of Heraklion, Greece, from October 2012 to April 2015. XDR-AB isolates were mainly susceptible to colistin (93.5%) and tigecycline (25.8%), whereas 6 (6.5%) were pandrug-resistant. Prior to infection, patients had long durations of mechanical ventilation and hospital stay and multiple exposures to antibiotics. Median Charlson co-morbidity and APACHE II scores were 2 and 17, respectively. Mortality at 28 days of infection onset was high (34.4%) despite high rates of in-vitro-active empirical (81.7%) and definitive (90.3%) treatment. Active colistin-based combination therapy (n = 55) and monotherapy (n = 29) groups had similar 28-day mortality (27.6% vs. 30.9%, respectively) and Kaplan–Meier survival estimates over time. In multivariable Cox regression, advanced age (aHR = 1.05 per year increase, 95% CI 1.02–1.09), rapidly fatal underlying disease (aHR = 2.64, 95% CI 0.98–9.17) and APACHE II score (aHR = 1.06 per unit increase, 95% CI 0.99–1.14) were identified as independent predictors of 28-day mortality, but no difference in mortality hazards between the active colistin-based combination therapy and monotherapy groups was produced (aHR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.35–2.38). These results support the use of colistin as a first-line agent against VAP in settings where XDR-AB is endemic, but oppose the introduction of colistin-based combination therapy as standard treatment

Post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome in patients with schizophrenia treated with olanzapine long-acting injection, I: analysis of cases

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>An advance in the treatment of schizophrenia is the development of long-acting intramuscular formulations of antipsychotics, such as olanzapine long-acting injection (LAI). During clinical trials, a post-injection syndrome characterized by signs of delirium and/or excessive sedation was identified in a small percentage of patients following injection with olanzapine LAI.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Safety data from all completed and ongoing trials of olanzapine LAI were reviewed for possible cases of this post-injection syndrome. Descriptive analyses were conducted to characterize incidence, clinical presentation, and outcome. Regression analyses were conducted to assess possible risk factors.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Based on approximately 45,000 olanzapine LAI injections given to 2054 patients in clinical trials through 14 October 2008, post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome occurred in approximately 0.07% of injections or 1.4% of patients (30 cases in 29 patients). Symptomatology was consistent with olanzapine overdose (e.g., sedation, confusion, slurred speech, altered gait, or unconsciousness). However, no clinically significant decreases in vital signs were observed. Symptom onset ranged from immediate to 3 to 5 hours post injection, with a median onset time of 25 minutes post injection. All patients recovered within 1.5 to 72 hours, and the majority continued to receive further olanzapine LAI injections following the event. No clear risk factors were identified.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome can be readily identified based on symptom presentation, progression, and temporal relationship to the injection, and is consistent with olanzapine overdose following probable accidental intravascular injection of a portion of the olanzapine LAI dose. Although there is no specific antidote for olanzapine overdose, patients can be treated symptomatically as needed. Special precautions include use of proper injection technique and a post-injection observation period.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov ID; URL: <url>http://http//www.clinicaltrials.gov/</url>: NCT00094640, NCT00088478, NCT00088491, NCT00088465, and NCT00320489.</p

What is the risk of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy in patients with ulcerative colitis or Crohn’s Disease treated with vedolizumab?

Background: Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy is a serious condition linked to certain diseases and immunosuppressant therapies, including the α4 integrin antagonist natalizumab. No cases have been reported to date with vedolizumab, a selective antagonist of the α4β7 integrin expressed on gut-homing lymphocytes. This analysis aimed to describe the current and future expected occurrence of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy with vedolizumab use, were the risk the same as in other populations in which this disease has been studied. Methods: The expected number of vedolizumab-associated progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy cases was estimated up to May 19, 2016 and modelled up to 2034. These estimates were based on the cumulative exposure to the drug, assuming an equivalent risk to that of patients treated with natalizumab or those from other reference populations where progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy has been examined. Future cases were modelled based on similar risks and projected sales. Results: The cumulative vedolizumab exposure was estimated at 54,619 patient-years, with a 95% confidence interval of 0.0–6.75 cases per 100,000 patient-years. An estimated 30.2 (95% confidence interval 19.4–40.9) cases of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy would have occurred if vedolizumab had the same risk as that of natalizumab. There would be a 50% chance of the first case occurring by 2018, assuming an equivalent risk to the general population. Conclusions: These analyses indicate the risk of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy with vedolizumab is small, and unlikely to be above 6.75 cases per 100,000 patient-years

Bridging health technology assessment (HTA) with multicriteria decision analyses (MCDA): field testing of the EVIDEM framework for coverage decisions by a public payer in Canada

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Consistent healthcare decisionmaking requires systematic consideration of decision criteria and evidence available to inform them. This can be tackled by combining multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) and Health Technology Assessment (HTA). The objective of this study was to field-test a decision support framework (EVIDEM), explore its utility to a drug advisory committee and test its reliability over time.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Tramadol for chronic non-cancer pain was selected by the health plan as a case study relevant to their context. Based on extensive literature review, a by-criterion HTA report was developed to provide synthesized evidence for each criterion of the framework (14 criteria for the MCDA Core Model and 6 qualitative criteria for the Contextual Tool). During workshop sessions, committee members tested the framework in three steps by assigning: 1) weights to each criterion of the MCDA Core Model representing individual perspective; 2) scores for tramadol for each criterion of the MCDA Core Model using synthesized data; and 3) qualitative impacts of criteria of the Contextual Tool on the appraisal. Utility and reliability of the approach were explored through discussion, survey and test-retest. Agreement between test and retest data was analyzed by calculating intra-rater correlation coefficients (ICCs) for weights, scores and MCDA value estimates.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The framework was found useful by the drug advisory committee in supporting systematic consideration of a broad range of criteria to promote a consistent approach to appraising healthcare interventions. Directly integrated in the framework as a "by-criterion" HTA report, synthesized evidence for each criterion facilitated its consideration, although this was sometimes limited by lack of relevant data. Test-retest analysis showed fair to good consistency of weights, scores and MCDA value estimates at the individual level (ICC ranging from 0.676 to 0.698), thus lending some support for the reliability of the approach. Overall, committee members endorsed the inclusion of most framework criteria and revealed important areas of discussion, clarification and adaptation of the framework to the needs of the committee.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>By promoting systematic consideration of all decision criteria and the underlying evidence, the framework allows a consistent approach to appraising healthcare interventions. Further testing and validation are needed to advance MCDA approaches in healthcare decisionmaking.</p