Ibrutinib as initial therapy for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia

Background: chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) primarily affects older persons who often have coexisting conditions in addition to disease-related immunosuppression and myelosuppression. We conducted an international, open-label, randomized phase 3 trial to compare two oral agents, ibrutinib and chlorambucil, in previously untreated older patients with CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma. Methods: we randomly assigned 269 previously untreated patients who were 65 years of age or older and had CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma to receive ibrutinib or chlorambucil. The primary end point was progression-free survival as assessed by an independent review committee. Results: the median age of the patients was 73 years. During a median follow-up period of 18.4 months, ibrutinib resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival than did chlorambucil (median, not reached vs. 18.9 months), with a risk of progression or death that was 84% lower with ibrutinib than that with chlorambucil (hazard ratio, 0.16; P<0.001). Ibrutinib significantly prolonged overall survival; the estimated survival rate at 24 months was 98% with ibrutinib versus 85% with chlorambucil, with a relative risk of death that was 84% lower in the ibrutinib group than in the chlorambucil group (hazard ratio, 0.16; P=0.001). The overall response rate was higher with ibrutinib than with chlorambucil (86% vs. 35%, P<0.001). The rates of sustained increases from baseline values in the hemoglobin and platelet levels were higher with ibrutinib. Adverse events of any grade that occurred in at least 20% of the patients receiving ibrutinib included diarrhea, fatigue, cough, and nausea; adverse events occurring in at least 20% of those receiving chlorambucil included nausea, fatigue, neutropenia, anemia, and vomiting. In the ibrutinib group, four patients had a grade 3 hemorrhage and one had a grade 4 hemorrhage. A total of 87% of the patients in the ibrutinib group are continuing to take ibrutinib. Conclusions: ibrutinib was superior to chlorambucil in previously untreated patients with CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma, as assessed by progression-free survival, overall survival, response rate, and improvement in hematologic variables. (Funded by Pharmacyclics and others; RESONATE-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01722487.)

Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome

Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Entecavir: a review of its use in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B in patients with decompensated liver disease

The oral deoxyguanosine nucleoside analogue entecavir (Baraclude®) has potent activity against hepatitis B virus (HBV) and a high genetic barrier to resistance. This article reviews the clinical efficacy and tolerability of entecavir in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B in patients with decompensated liver disease, as well as summarizing its pharmacological properties. Entecavir 1 mg/day was more effective than adefovir dipivoxil 10 mg/day in the treatment of patients with chronic hepatitis B and decompensated liver disease, according to the results of a randomized, open-label, multicentre trial. Patients were either nucleos(t)ide naive or lamivudine experienced. The reduction from baseline in HBV DNA levels at week 24 (primary endpoint) was significantly greater with entecavir than with adefovir dipivoxil. The proportion of patients with HBV DNA levels of <300 copies/mL was also significantly greater with entecavir than with adefovir dipivoxil at weeks 24, 48 and 96, as was the proportion of patients with ALT normalization. Entecavir 0.5 or 1 mg/day, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate 300 mg/day and a fixed-dose combination of emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate 200 mg/300 mg per day were effective in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B in patients with decompensated liver disease, according to the 48-week analysis of a randomized, double-blind, multicentre trial, primarily designed to examine tolerability endpoints. In this trial, over one-third of patients had received previous therapy with lamivudine for ≥6 months. The efficacy of entecavir in treatment-naive patients with HBV-related decompensated cirrhosis did not significantly differ from that seen in patients with chronic hepatitis B or compensated cirrhosis (compensated group), according to the results of a prospective, nonrandomized study. After 6 or 12 months of entecavir treatment, there were no significant differences between the decompensated and compensated groups in virological, biochemical or serological endpoints. In patients with decompensated cirrhosis, significant improvements from baseline in liver function were seen after 12 months of entecavir therapy. Oral entecavir was generally well tolerated in patients with chronic hepatitis B and decompensated liver disease, with most of the reported treatment-emergent adverse events consistent with decompensated liver disease. In the trial primarily designed to examine tolerability endpoints, there was no significant difference between patients receiving entecavir and those receiving tenofovir disoproxil fumarate with or without emtricitabine in terms of the proportion of patients experiencing tolerability failure or the proportion of patients with confirmed increases in serum creatinine levels of ≥0.5 mg/dL above baseline or confirmed serum phosphorus levels of <2.0 mg/dL at week 48 (co-primary endpoints). It has been suggested that the risk of lactic acidosis associated with oral nucleos(t)ide analogue therapy is increased in patients with highly impaired liver function. However, only one case of lactic acidosis was reported among entecavir recipients across two clinical trials in patients with chronic hepatitis B and decompensated liver disease. Moreover, small studies found that the risk of lactic acidosis was not increased in patients with chronic hepatitis B and decompensated liver disease who received entecavir, compared with patients with non-HBV decompensated liver disease. In conclusion, entecavir is a valuable agent for the first-line treatment of chronic hepatitis B in patients with decompensated liver disease

Management of Rheumatoid Arthritis: Defining the Role of Etanercept

Rheumatoid arthritis is associated with substantial costs to both the individual and society; costs increase as disease severity worsens. Current thinking is that disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy should be started as soon as possible after the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis and that patients should be offered the most effective treatment available. Etanercept is a soluble dimeric fusion protein comprising two copies of the extracellular ligand-binding domain of the human p75 receptor for tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNFalpha) linked to the constant portion of human immunoglobulin G1. TNFalpha is thought to play an important role in the pathophysiology of rheumatoid arthritis; by binding the cytokine, etanercept blocks its biologic effects. In a 12-month double-blind, randomized study involving patients with early active rheumatoid arthritis, administration of subcutaneous etanercept 25mg twice weekly was associated with a more rapid and significantly greater overall response (assessed using American College of Rheumatology criteria) than oral methotrexate. In addition, compared with methotrexate, etanercept was associated with more rapid slowing of radiographic progression and a more rapid improvement in measures of health-related quality of life. The efficacy of etanercept was maintained at 3 years' follow-up. Etanercept, alone or in combination with methotrexate, also showed sustained efficacy in three double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled studies of 3 to 6 months' duration involving patients with active rheumatoid arthritis who had not responded adequately to previous treatment with DMARDs. Etanercept was generally well tolerated in clinical trials (the most commonly occurring adverse events included injection site reactions, infection, headache, nausea, rhinitis, dizziness, pharyngitis and cough). The high cost of etanercept relative to traditional DMARDs may be justified if it can be shown to reduce long-term outcomes associated with rheumatoid arthritis, thereby reducing disease costs. Conclusion: Etanercept is an important new treatment option in rheumatoid arthritis. It provides a rapid and sustained reduction in disease activity and inhibits the progression of structural damage in patients with early active rheumatoid arthritis, with good tolerability. The improvement in disease activity and slowing of joint damage seen with etanercept was more rapid than that seen with methotrexate. In addition, etanercept, alone or in combination with methotrexate, is effective in the treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis who have not responded adequately to previous DMARD therapy. It is anticipated that etanercept may also improve the long-term outcome of patients with rheumatoid arthritis and reduce the substantial economic burden imposed by the disease; however, more long-term data are needed to establish this.Antirheumatics, Corticosteroids, Disease modifying antirheumatics, Etanercept, Methotrexate, Rheumatoid arthritis