A real-world multicentre evaluation of atezolizumab plus platinum-etoposide chemotherapy as first-line treatment in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer in Italy.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to analyze real-life data from a cohort of adult patients receiving atezolizumab in combination with carboplatin and etoposide for first-line treatment of ES-SCLC, in order to assess relative dose intensity (RDI), time-to-treatment discontinuation (TTD), time-to-treatment failure (TTF), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) of treatments as well as the correlation between these outcomes. METHODS: An observational retrospective study was conducted. All patients treated with atezolizumab combined with carboplatin and etoposide for first-line treatment of ES-SCLC were included. Median TTD, TTF, PFS and OS were calculated in our cohort of patient by the Kaplan Meier method. RESULTS: The curves obtained with the Kaplan Meier method of TTF and TTD are substantially similar, indicating a good concordance of the information extracted by the two different data sources. This tendency was confirmed also when the TTD versus PFS curves were compared. The median OS registered was 11.8 months. Patients with no liver metastases showed a longer median time of OS than patients with liver metastases. The mean value of RDI for the entire cohort was 87.4%. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that TTD, calculated from the administration data is a useful proxy of TTF as registered in the clinical chart. TTD is a real-world outcome that can be used to demonstrate the efficacy of drugs used for administered therapies. It can be used as an end point for RWE studies, where the evaluation is less structured and standardized.

The lack of head-to-head randomised trials and the consequences for patients and national health service: The case of non-small cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: To introduce a drug to the market, it's not mandatory for it to be more effective and safer than the current treatment for the same condition. Consequently, head-to-head studies between the two best treatments for the same condition are not required, and this could result in a lack of information for patients, clinicians, and decision-makers. This study aims to evaluate the presence of head-to-head studies among the drugs used for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Taking into account the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines updated to 2022, which list all available treatments for each NSCLC subtype, the search engine Pubmed and the platform clinicaltrials.gov were consulted to find all completed and ongoing head-to-head studies among various treatments for NSCLC. RESULTS: Among the anti-EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor) drugs, 7 studies were found, with 6 completed and 5 registrational for drug commercialisation. No completed study to date has compared osimertinib and afatinib. For anti-ALK (anaplastic lymphoma kinase) drugs, 7 studies were found, with 5 completed. Alectinib, brigatinib, and lorlatinib have no completed comparison studies, but all were compared with crizotinib. Among various immunotherapy-based regimens, 5 studies were found, with only 1 completed. Therapeutic regimens based on pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, or the combination of nivolumab/ipilimumab have not been compared in studies published to date. CONCLUSION: There are few head-to-head studies comparing treatments for NSCLC; there are no such studies between the latest generation of drugs. Consequently, ambiguous areas exist due to the lack of comparative studies among the available evidence, preventing the clinician's choice of the most effective treatment and risking the patient receiving suboptimal therapy. Simultaneously, the price of the drug cannot be determined correctly, relying only on indirect evaluations from different trials. To dispel this uncertainty, it would be desirable to initiate a process that brings together the demands derived from clinical practice and clinical research to provide clinicians and patients with the best possible evidence.

Comparing clinical trial population representativeness to real-world users of 17 biologics approved for immune-mediated inflammatory diseases: An external validity analysis of 66,639 biologic users from the Italian VALORE project.

To date, no population-based studies have specifically explored the external validity of pivotal randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of biologics simultaneously for a broad spectrum of immuno-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs). The aims of this study were, firstly, to compare the patients' characteristics and median treatment duration of biologics approved for IMIDs between RCTs' and real-world setting (RW); secondly, to assess the extent of biologic users treated for IMIDs in the real-world setting that would not have been eligible for inclusion into pivotal RCT for each indication of use. Using the Italian VALORE distributed database (66,639 incident biologic users), adult patients with IMIDs treated with biologics in the Italian real-world setting were substantially older (mean age ± SD: 50 ± 15 years) compared to those enrolled in pivotal RCTs (45 ± 15 years). In the real-world setting, certolizumab pegol was more commonly used by adult women with psoriasis/ankylosing spondylitis (F/M ratio: 1.8-1.9) compared to RCTs (F/M ratio: 0.5-0.6). The median treatment duration (weeks) of incident biologic users in RW was significantly higher than the duration of pivotal RCTs in almost all indications for use and most biologics (4-100 vs. 6-167). Furthermore, almost half (46.4%) of biologic users from RW settings would have been ineligible for inclusion in the respective indication-specific pivotal RCTs. The main reasons were: advanced age, recent history of cancer and presence of other concomitant IMIDs. These findings suggest that post-marketing surveillance of biologics should be prioritized for those patients.

Time to treatment discontinuation in first-line non-small cell lung carcinoma: an overview.

OBJECTIVE: Time To Discontinuation (TTD) is defined as the time from the start of treatment to the end of treatment, usually occurring due to loss of efficacy or occurrence of adverse events. It has become an important surrogate efficacy endpoint especially in real-world studies due to its correlation with endpoints such as Progression Free Survival (PFS). The aim of the study is to conduct a literature review of all studies reporting TTD in first-line therapy of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: All articles that reported TTD for any first-line treatment of NSCLC as of 30 June 2022 were extracted from the PubMed search engine. From these articles, the drugs, study type, and TTD values were extracted. A descriptive analysis of the studies was made, dividing the TTD by subgroup according to the type of treatment (traditional chemotherapy, target therapy, immunotherapy) and study design (clinical trials, real world studies). RESULTS: Fifty-five studies were considered for the analysis, of which 12 were published in 2021; 28 were clinical trials and 27 were real-world studies. Thirty of the studies considered involved conventional chemotherapy and expressed TTD values from 1.4 to 4.5 months, 5 of the studies considered involved immunotherapy with TTD values from 2.1 to 7.4 months and 18 of the studies considered target therapy, with TTD values from 4 to 31 months. The clinical trials reported TTD values from 1.4 to 16 months and the real-world studies from 2 to 31 months. CONCLUSION: Studies reporting TTD are increasing, most notably real-world studies. Given the increasing importance of TTD as an efficacy endpoint, it becomes critical to measure and monitor it in various therapeutic settings such as NSCLC. This is the first study to review all TTD values of drugs used in first-line NSCLC.

Testing of Coding Algorithms for Inflammatory Bowel Disease Identification, as Indication for Use of Biological Drugs, Using a Claims Database from Southern Italy.

Background: Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs), Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), are chronic diseases that have been increasingly treated with biological drugs in recent years. Newly developed coding algorithms for IBD identification using claims databases are needed to improve post-marketing surveillance of biological drugs. Objective: To test algorithms to identify CD and UC, as indication for use of biological drugs approved for IBD treatment, using a claims database. Methods: Data were extracted from the Caserta Local Health Unit database between 2015 and 2018. CD/UC diagnoses reported by specialists in electronic therapeutic plans (ETPs) were considered as gold standard. Five algorithms were developed based on ICD-9-CM codes as primary cause of hospital admissions, exemption from healthcare service co-payment codes and drugs dispensing with only indication for CD/UC. The accuracy was assessed by sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), positive (PPV) and negative predicted values (NPV) along with computation of the Youden Index and F-score. Results: In the study period, 1205 subjects received at least one biological drug dispensing approved for IBD and 134 (11.1%) received ≥1 ETP with IBD as use indication. Patients with CD and CU were 83 (61.9%) and 51 (38.1%), respectively. Sensitivity of the different algorithms ranged from 71.1% (95% CI: 60.1-80.5) to 98.8 (95% CI: 93.5-100.0) for CD and from 64.7% (95% CI: 50.1-77.6) to 94.1 (95% CI: 83.8-98.8) for UC, while specificity was always higher than 91%. The best CD algorithm was "Algorithm 3", based on hospital CD diagnosis code OR CD exemption code OR [IBD exemption code AND dispensing of non-biological drugs with only CD indication] (Se: 98.8%; Sp: 97.2%; PPV: 84.5%, NPV: 99.8%), achieving the highest diagnostic accuracy (Youden Index=0.960). The best UC algorithm was "Algorithm 3", based on specific hospital UC diagnosis code OR UC exemption code OR [IBD exemption code AND golimumab dispensing] OR dispensing of non-biological drugs with only UC indication (Se: 94.1%; Sp: 91.6%; PPV: 50.0%; NPV: 99.4%), and achieving the highest diagnostic accuracy (Youden Index=0.857). Conclusion: In a population-based claims database, newly coding algorithms including diagnostic and exemption codes plus specific drug dispensing yielded highly accurate identification of CD and UC as distinct indication for biological drug use.

Post-Marketing Surveillance of CAR-T-Cell Therapies: Analysis of the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) Database.

INTRODUCTION: As chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapies are becoming increasingly available in the armamentarium of the hematologist, there is an emerging need to monitor post-marketing safety. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to better characterize their safety profile by focusing on cytokine release syndrome and identifying emerging signals. METHODS: We queried the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (October 2017-September 2020) to analyze suspected adverse drug reactions to tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) and axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel). Disproportionality analyses (reporting odds ratio) were performed by comparing chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapies with (a) all other drugs (reference group 1) and (b) other onco-hematological drugs with a similar indication, irrespective of age (reference group 2), or (c) restricted to adults (reference group 3). Notoriety was assessed through package inserts and risk management plans. Adverse drug reaction time to onset and cytokine release syndrome features were investigated. RESULTS: Overall, 3225 reports (1793 axi-cel; 1433 tisa-cel) were identified. The reported toxicities were mainly: cytokine release syndrome (52.2%), febrile disorders (27.7%), and neurotoxicity (27.2%). Cytokine release syndrome and neurotoxicity were often co-reported and 75% of the events occurred in the first 10 days. Disproportionalities confirmed known adverse drug reactions and showed unexpected associations: for example, axi-cel with cardiomyopathies (reporting odds ratio = 2.3; 95% confidence interval 1.2-4.4) and gastrointestinal perforations (2.9; 1.2-7.3), tisa-cel with hepatotoxicity (2.5; 1.1-5.7) and pupil disorders (15.3; 6-39.1). CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms the well-known adverse drug reactions and detects potentially emerging safety issues specific for each chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, also providing insights into a stronger role for tisa-cel in inducing some immunodeficiency-related events (e.g., hypogammaglobulinemia, infections) and coagulopathies, and for axi-cel in neurotoxicity.

Overview of the European post-authorisation study register post-authorization studies performed in Europe from September 2010 to December 2018.

BACKGROUND: The European post-authorisation study (EU PAS) register is a repository launched in 2010 by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). All EMA-requested PAS, commonly observational studies, must be recorded in this register. Multi-database studies (MDS) leveraging secondary data have become an important strategy to conduct PAS in recent years, as reflected by the type of studies registered in the EU PAS register. OBJECTIVES: To analyse and describe PAS in the EU PAS register, with focus on MDS. METHODS: Studies in the EU PAS register from inception to 31st December 2018 were described concerning transparency, regulatory obligations, scope, study type (e.g., observational study, clinical trial, survey, systematic review/meta-analysis), study design, type of data collection and target population. MDS were defined as studies conducted through secondary use of >1 data source not linked at patient-level. Data extraction was carried out independently by 14 centres with expertise in pharmacoepidemiology, using publicly available information in the EU PAS register including study protocol, whenever available, using a standardised data collection form. For validation purposes, a second revision of key fields for a 15% random sample of studies was carried out by a different centre. The inter-rater reliability (IRR) was then calculated. Finally, to identify predictors of primary data collection-based studies/versus those based on secondary use of healthcare databases) or MDS (vs. non-MDS), odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated fitting univariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: Overall, 1426 studies were identified. Clinical trials (N = 30; 2%), systematic reviews/meta-analyses (N = 16; 1%) and miscellaneous study designs (N = 46; 3%) were much less common than observational studies (N = 1227; 86%). The protocol was available for 63% (N = 360) of 572 observational studies requested by a competent authority. Overall, 36% (N = 446) of observational studies were based fully or partially on primary data collection. Of 757 observational studies based on secondary use of data alone, 282 (37%) were MDS. Drug utilisation was significantly more common as a study scope in MDS compared to non-MDS studies. The overall percentage agreement among collaborating centres that collected the data concerning study variables was highest for study type (93.5%) and lowest for type of secondary data (67.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Observational studies were the most common type of studies in the EU PAS register, but 30% used primary data, which is more resource-intensive. Almost half of observational studies using secondary data were MDS. Data recording in the EU PAS register may be improved further, including more widespread availability of study protocols to improve transparency.

Large-Scale Postmarketing Surveillance of Biological Drugs for Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases Through an Italian Distributed Multi-Database Healthcare Network: The VALORE Project.

BACKGROUND: Biological drugs have improved the management of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) despite being associated with important safety issues such as immunogenicity, infections, and malignancies in real-world settings. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the potential of a large Italian multi-database distributed network for use in the postmarketing surveillance of biological drugs, including biosimilars, in patients with IMID. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using 13 Italian regional claims databases during 2010-2019. A tailor-made R-based tool developed for distributed analysis of claims data using a study-specific common data model was customized for this study. We measured the yearly prevalence of biological drug users and the frequency of switches between originator and biosimilars for infliximab, etanercept, and adalimumab separately and stratified them by calendar year and region. We then calculated the cumulative number of users and person-years (PYs) of exposure to individual biological drugs approved for IMIDs. For a number of safety outcomes (e.g., severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-COV-2] infection), we conducted a sample power calculation to estimate the PYs of exposure required to investigate their association with individual biological drugs approved for IMIDs, considering different strengths of association. RESULTS: From a total underlying population of almost 50 million inhabitants from 13 Italian regions, we identified 143,602 (0.3%) biological drug users, with a cumulative exposure of 507,745 PYs during the entire follow-up. The mean age ± standard deviation of biological drug users was 49.3 ± 16.3, with a female-to-male ratio of 1.2. The age-adjusted yearly prevalence of biological drug users increased threefold from 0.7 per 1000 in 2010 to 2.1 per 1000 in 2019. Overall, we identified 40,996 users of biosimilars of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors (i.e., etanercept, adalimumab, and infliximab) in the years 2015-2019. Of these, 46% (N = 18,845) switched at any time between originator and biosimilars or vice versa. To investigate a moderate association (incidence rate ratio 2) between biological drugs approved for IMIDs and safety events of interest, such as optic neuritis (lowest background incidence rate 10.4/100,000 PYs) or severe infection (highest background incidence rate 4312/100,000 PYs), a total of 43,311 PYs and 104 PYs of exposure to individual biological drugs, respectively, would be required. As such, using this network, of 15 individual biological drugs approved for IMIDs, the association with those adverse events could be investigated for four (27%) and 14 (93%), respectively. CONCLUSION: The VALORE project multi-database network has access to data on more than 140,000 biological drug users (and > 0.5 million PYs) from 13 Italian regions during the years 2010-2019, which will be further expanded with the inclusion of data from other regions and more recent calendar years. Overall, the cumulated amount of person-time of exposure to biological drugs approved for IMIDs provides enough statistical power to investigate weak/moderate associations of almost all individual compounds and the most relevant safety outcomes. Moreover, this network may offer the opportunity to investigate the interchangeability of originator and biosimilars of several TNFα inhibitors in different therapeutic areas in real-world settings.

Cancer Patients at Risk for Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw. A Case and Control Study Analyzing Predictors of MRONJ Onset.

The goal of this investigation was to identify potential risk factors to predict the onset of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ). Through the identification of the multiple variables positively associated to MRONJ, we aim to write a paradigm for integrated MRONJ risk assessment built on the combined analysis of systemic and local risk factors. The characteristics of a cohort of cancer patients treated with zoledronic acid and/or denosumab were investigated; beyond the set of proven risk factors a new potential one, the intake of new molecules for cancer therapy, was addressed. Registered data were included in univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis in order to individuate significant independent predictors of MRONJ; a propensity score-matching method was performed adjusting by age and sex. Univariate logistic regression analysis showed a significant effect of the parameters number of doses of zoledronic acid and/or denosumab (OR = 1.03; 95% CI = 1.01-1.05; p = 0.008) and chemotherapy (OR = 0.35; 95% CI = 0.17-0.71; p = 0.008). The multiple logistic regression model showed that breast, multiple myeloma, and prostate cancer involved a significantly higher risk compared to lung cancer; a significant effect of the combined variables number of doses of zoledronic acid and/or denosumab (OR = 1.03; 95% CI = 1.01-1.06); p-value = 0.03) and exposure to novel molecule treatment (OR = 34.74; 95% CI = 1.39-868.11; p-value = 0.03) was observed. The results suggest that a risk assessment paradigm is needed for personalized prevention strategies in the light of patient-centered care.

Are Patients with Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis Undertreated? A Population-Based Study from Southern Italy.

This study aimed to explore the pattern of use of different treatment lines in psoriasis (PsO) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients from Southern Italy. A retrospective cohort study was performed during the years 2010-2018 using data from the Caserta Local Health Unit (LHU) claims database. All of the PsO or PsA patients were identified. The proportion of PsO/PsA patients untreated or treated with ≥1 drug classes (i.e., non-disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (non-DMARDs), conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs), biological drugs (bDMARDs) or targeted synthetic small molecules (tsDMARDs)) was calculated in the years 2016-2018. Among the bDMARD users, the median times from the first registered PsO/PsA diagnosis/from the first csDMARD to the first bDMARD were calculated. Overall, 10,296 (1.1%) and 1724 (0.2%) PsO and PsA patients were identified. More than half of the PsO patients (N = 5301; 51.6%) and 15% of the PsA patients (N = 251) were not treated with any drug. A very low proportion of PsO patients (N = 121; 1.2%) received csDMARDs/bDMARDs dispensing. Instead, 538 (32.2%) PsA patients were treated with bDMARDs. The median times from the first diagnosis to the first bDMARD dispensing were 54.0 (Q1-Q3: 30.5-72.2) and 13.3 (Q1-Q3: 3.1-43.9) months in the PsO and PsA patients, respectively. The median time from the first csDMARD to the first bDMARD dispensing was shorter in the PsO [9.2 months (Q1-Q3: 5.5-30.0)] than in the PsA [14.5 months (Q1-Q3: 8.6-33.5)] patients. A potential undertreatment of PsO (much less for PsA) in an LHU from Southern Italy, with a particularly low use of more recently marketed drugs, such as biological ones, was shown.

Safety and potential interaction of immunosuppressive drugs for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease in elderly patients.

Inflammatory bowel diseases, including Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, are chronic diseases associated with increased morbidity and reduced quality of life. Age may represent a risk factor for adverse events, due to the multimorbidity and polypharmacy, common in elderly patients. Elderly are often not included in clinical trials evaluating efficacy and safety of study drugs for the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases. Several drugs, such as aminosalicylates, systemic corticosteroids, immunosuppressant drugs, biological drugs and Janus Kinase inhibitors, are available for the management of inflammatory bowel diseases. With the increasing spectrum of therapeutic options, it is therefore important to analyze the evidence regarding the safety of the use of these agents in elderly patients. Selection of immunosuppressive therapy is a challenge in the management of elderly patients with inflammatory bowel diseases, for whom biologics with a lower risk of infection or cancer, such as vedolizumab and ustekinumab, may be preferred in elderly patients. Concomitant therapies and comorbidities must be thoroughly investigated before initiating any immunosuppressive or biological therapy in order to minimize the risk of drug-drug interactions. This review aims to provide an overview of the safety of thiopurines, methotrexate and target therapies as well as their drug-drug interactions in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases.

Chronic polytherapy after myocardial infarction: the trade-off between hospital and community-based providers in determining adherence to medication.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of chronic polytherapy in reducing readmissions and death after myocardial infarction (MI) have been clearly shown. However, real-world evidence shows poor medication adherence and large geographic variation, suggesting critical issues in access to optimal care. Our objectives were to measure adherence to polytherapy, to compare the amount of variation attributable to hospitals of discharge and to community-based providers, and to identify determinants of adherence to medications. METHODS: This is a population-based study. Data were obtained from the information systems of the Lazio and Tuscany Regions, Italy (9.5 million inhabitants). Patients hospitalized with incident MI in 2010-2014 were analyzed. The outcome measure was medication adherence, defined as a Medication Possession Ratio (MPR) ≥ 0.75 for at least 3 of the following drugs: antiplatelets, ß-blockers, ACEI/ARBs, statins. A 2-year cohort-study was performed. Cross-classified multilevel models were applied to analyze geographic variation. The variance components attributable to hospitals of discharge and community-based providers were expressed as Median Odds Ratio (MOR). RESULTS: A total of 32,962 patients were enrolled. About 63% of patients in the Lazio cohort and 59% of the Tuscan cohort were adherent to chronic polytherapy. Women and patients aged 85 years and over were most at risk of non-adherence. In both regions, adherence was higher for patients discharged from cardiology wards (Lazio: OR = 1.58, p < 0.001, Tuscany: OR = 1.59, p < 0.001) and for patients with a percutaneous coronary intervention during the index admission. Relevant variation between community-based providers was observed, though when the hospital of discharge was included as a cross-classified level, in both Lazio and Tuscany regions the variation attributable to hospitals of discharge was the only significant component (Lazio: MOR = 1.30, p = 0.001; Tuscany: MOR = 1.31, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Adherence to best practice treatments after MI is not consistent with clinical guidelines, and varies between patient groups as well as within and between regions. The variation attributable to providers is affected by the hospital of discharge, up to two years from the acute episode. This variation is likely to be attributable to hospital discharge processes, and could be reduced through appropriate policy levers.

Psoriasis and psoriasiform reactions secondary to immune checkpoint inhibitors.

The advent of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICIs) as a standard of care for several cancers, including melanoma and head/neck squamous cell carcinoma has changed the therapeutic approach to these conditions, drawing at the same time the attention on some safety issues related to their use. To assess the incidence of psoriasis as a specific immune-related cutaneous adverse event attributing to ICIs using the Eudravigilance reporting system. All reports of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) concerning either exacerbation of psoriasis or de novo onset of psoriasis/psoriasiform reactions associated to the use of Cytotoxic T-Lymphocyte Antigen-4 (CTLA-4) inhibitors ipilimumab and tremelimumab, and the Programmed cell Death protein 1/Programmed Death-Ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) inhibitors nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab, avelumab, and cemiplimab were identified and extracted from the Eudravigilance reporting system, during the period between the date of market licensing (for each study drug) and 30 October 2020. 8213 reports of cutaneous ADRs associated with at least one of study drug have been recorded, of which 315 (3.8%) reporting psoriasis and/or psoriasiform reactions as ADR. In 70.8% of reports patients had pre-existing disease. ICIs-related skin toxicity is a well-established phenomenon, presenting with several conditions, sustained by an immune background based on the activity of some cells (CD4+/CD8+ T-cells, neutrophils, eosinophils, and plasmocytes), inflammatory mediators, chemokines, and tumor-specific antibodies. In this setting, psoriasis represents probably the most paradigmatic model of these reactions, thus requiring adequate recognition as no guidelines on management are now available.

Safety profile of immune checkpoint inhibitors: An analysis of the Italian spontaneous reporting system database.

AIMS: To provide an overview of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) safety profile using the Italian spontaneous adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting system. METHODS: We selected all ADR reports attributed to ipilimumab (CTLA-4 inhibitor), nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab (PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors) from the Italian spontaneous reporting system (2011-2018). Descriptive analyses of reports for ICIs have been conducted. Time to onset of adverse effects was stratified by system organ class. Reporting odds ratio was used as measure of ADR reporting disproportionality. ICI-related ADR reports were compared with 2 reference groups, i.e. all other suspected drugs or all other antineoplastic agents. RESULTS: Overall, 2217 (0.7%) reports were related to ICIs (nivolumab: 72.2% of those reports; ipilimumab: 14.3%; pembrolizumab: 10.3%; and atezolizumab: 3.5%). ICI-related ADR reports mostly involved males (65%) and median age was 67 (interquartile range 59-73) years. Serious reports accounted for 48.8%. Frequencies of endocrine, general, hepatobiliary, metabolism, musculoskeletal, respiratory disorders, infections and neoplasms were significantly higher for ICIs than for all other drugs (P < .001). Except for infections, similar results emerged through comparison with other anticancer drugs. Colitis, hypophysitis and skin disorders were more frequently reported for anti-CTLA-4 drugs than PD-1/PD-L1 ICIs, and the opposite for musculoskeletal effects, pneumonia, and thyroid dysfunctions. ICIs were disproportionally associated also with less known risks, e.g. ischaemic heart disease, cardiac failure and optic nerve disorders. CONCLUSION: The most frequently reported safety issues were probably immune-related adverse events including general, gastrointestinal and respiratory disorders. Potentially emerging safety signals, such as ischaemic heart disease and cardiac failure, requiring further investigation were detected.

Gender differences in COPD management in a Sicilian general practice setting: a cohort study evaluating the impact of educational interventions.

AIM: The aim of this study was to measure gender differences among COPD patients' quality of care (QOC) before and after two educational interventions in Southern Italy. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, COPD patients were identified from primary care electronic medical records (EMRs). Twelve process indicators concerning diagnosis, preventative measures and therapeutic processes were developed as a measure of QOC. Educational interventions consisted of clinical seminars and audits on COPD QOC at baseline, and at 12 and 24 months. QOC indicators were stratified by gender: odds ratios (ORs) (males as reference group) of having a good QOC indicator were calculated at baseline, 12 and 24 months, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using hierarchical generalised linear models. RESULTS: Of 46 326 people registered in the EMRs, 1463 COPD patients (3.1%) were identified, of which 37% were women. QOC indicators reflecting best practice 24 months after the educational programme were generally not different to baseline, often favouring men. On the other hand, the composite global QOC indicator suggested that while a good overall QOC at baseline was significantly higher in men than women (OR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.57-0.96), it became nonsignificant at 24 months (OR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.72-1.29). CONCLUSIONS: Specific QOC indicators among COPD patients often favoured men. However, several gender disparities seen at baseline disappeared at 24 months, suggesting that even general educational interventions which do not target gender can improve the gender disparity in QOC.

Potential Role of Anti-interleukin (IL)-6 Drugs in the Treatment of COVID-19: Rationale, Clinical Evidence and Risks.

The epidemic due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has been spreading globally, raising increasing concerns. This public health emergency has triggered a race to find medications to improve the prognosis of this disease. There is currently great interest in drug repositioning to manage SARS-CoV-2 infection, that is, the evaluation of the potential benefits of a drug that has already been proven safe and effective in humans for other approved indications. As interleukin-6 (IL-6) acts as a key driver of the inflammation associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), IL-6 and IL-6 receptor (IL-6R) inhibition appear to be promising targets for the treatment of COVID-19 patients. It is important to critically analyze the available evidence concerning the use of the available anti-IL-6 (siltuximab) and anti-IL-6R (tocilizumab and sarilumab) agents in COVID-19 patients, in terms of both benefit and risk. In this review, the pathogenesis of the cytokine storm induced by COVID-19, the role of IL-6 in this cytokine storm, the rationale for the use of anti-IL-6 agents, and key information on potential benefits and safety monitoring of these biologicals in COVID-19 patients is discussed.

Safety profile of biological medicines as compared with non-biologicals: an analysis of the italian spontaneous reporting system database.

BACKGROUND: Biologicals are important treatment options for various chronic diseases. After the introduction of the first biosimilars, animated debate arose in the scientific community about the actual benefit-risk profile of these drugs. In this context, a comparative safety evaluation of biologicals and biosimilars in clinical practice is warranted. METHODS: We identified all suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) concerning biological/biosimilars (excluding vaccines, toxins, blood derivatives, and radio-pharmaceuticals), and further classified them into mechanistic classes. We described the frequency of biological/biosimilar class- and compound-specific ADRs by system organ class (SOC) and type of reporter. We also separately explored the traceability of biologicals and biosimilar-related ADR reports. RESULTS: Overall 171,201 ADR reports were collected during the observation period; 9,601 (5.6 %) of these concerned biologicals. Biological-related reports were mainly issued by hospital-based physicians (78.7 %). Most of these reports involved monoclonal antibodies and fusion proteins (66.3 %). Reported ADRs were mainly 'skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders' (21 %), 'general and administration site disorders' (17 %), and 'gastrointestinal disorders' (13.6 %). In terms of traceability, 94.8 % of biological-related reports included an identifiable product name, whilst only 8.6 % indicated the corresponding batch number. Regarding biosimilars, 298 reports were identified, with a low proportion indicating drug ineffectiveness (10.1 %). CONCLUSIONS: Most ADRs attributed to biologicals are 'skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders'. Anticancer monoclonal antibodies are most frequently associated with ADRs. A low proportion of ADR reports concern biosimilars.