A case series of urinary bladder rhabdomyosarcoma in seven dogs.

Background: Juvenile urinary bladder rhabdomyosarcoma (ubRMS) is a known entity; however, literature regarding its clinical behavior and endoscopic features is scarce. The aim of this study was to describe clinical and endoscopic features, and outcomes of ubRMS in dogs. Case Description: Dogs undergoing transurethral endoscopy and with a histological diagnosis of ubRMS were retrospectively collected. Seven dogs with a median age of 18 months (range 6-32 months) were included in this retrospective, multicenter, and descriptive study. Median tumor size was 58 mm (range 30-65 mm), and tumor location was bladder neck in three cases, trigone in two cases, and bladder body in two cases. Two dogs had monolateral ureteral obstruction. Two dogs presented with regional lymphadenopathy and one dog had lung lesions suggestive of metastatic disease. A grape-like mass was reported in four cases and solid in two, with variable consistency (two friables, two firms, and two not reported). Tumor treatments included surgery in three cases, surgery, and adjuvant doxorubicin in one case, and palliative therapy in three cases. The overall median survival time (ST) was 45 days. STs were shorter (range 20-45 days) for dogs treated with palliative care than for dogs treated with curative-intent treatment (range 70-120 days). Conclusion: ubRMS should be considered as a differential diagnosis in young dogs presenting with bladder masses. In this study, ubRMS confirmed its aggressive clinical behavior. Surgery and chemotherapy seem to increase STs but the prognosis remains poor.

Gastroduodenal ulceration detected endoscopically in cats: retrospective study of 61 patients.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to describe the endoscopic appearance of gastroduodenal ulcers (GDUs), and to assess the clinical, ultrasonographic and histological data, as well as long-term follow-up, in cats. METHODS: The medical record databases of five veterinary endoscopists were evaluated between January 2016 and 2020, in a retrospective study. Cats with at least one gastric or duodenal ulcer detected by endoscopic examination were included. All the medical records of the selected cats were reviewed and information was collected regarding breed, age, sex, neuter status, medical history, clinical signs, and ultrasonographic, endoscopic and histological findings. The cats were evaluated at 6, 12 and 18 months. RESULTS: Sixty-one cats with a median age of 9.0 years (range 2.0-16.0) were included in the study. The most common complaints were vomiting (n = 55; 90%) and hyporexia (n = 40; 66%); haematemesis was reported in 12 (20%) cats. Endoscopy showed GDUs in the following locations: gastric body in 28 cats (46%), antropyloric area in 34 cats (56%), fundus in 13 cats (21%) and duodenum in eight cats (13%). A single GDU was found in 42 cats (69%) and multiple GDUs were seen in 19 cats (31%). Histopathological evaluation revealed benign lesions in 33 (54%) cats and malignant lesions in 28 (46%; 24 high-grade lymphoma, one low-grade lymphoma and three carcinoma). High-grade lymphoma was detected only in the stomach. Cats diagnosed with malignant GDUs (median 10.5, range 4-16) were significantly older than cats with benign lesions (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: GDUs are common and were detected in 5.1% of cats undergoing an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The risk of a malignant ulcer increases proportionally with each year of increasing age. GDU location, number and morphological appearance do not provide any indication of the nature of the ulcer; however, duodenal ulcers are frequently benign. Endoscopic examination facilitates the early and minimally invasive detection of GDUs in cats.

Endoscopic and Surgical Removal of Gastrointestinal Foreign Bodies in Dogs: An Analysis of 72 Cases.

In emergency veterinary practice, gastrointestinal foreign body (GFB) removal is a common procedure that is performed with different techniques, such as endoscopy or surgery. The aims of this retrospective, multicentre, clinical study were to report the common locations and types of objects recovered and to investigate clinical factors and outcomes in dogs after surgical or endoscopic treatment for GFB removal. Records of dogs with a GFB diagnosis referred to the Teaching Veterinary Hospital or treated in three different veterinary hospitals from September 2017 to September 2019 were examined. The data obtained from each case included breed, age, clinical signs at presentation, duration of clinical signs, type and location of the GFB, treatment, length of hospitalisation and outcome. Seventy-two dogs were enrolled in the study. There were 42 males (58%) and 30 females (42%). The median age was 36 months (range: 3 months to 8 years). Endoscopic retrieval was performed in 56% of GFBs (located in the stomach or duodenum), whereas 44% of dogs underwent surgery. The type of FB detected varied greatly: kid toy (14%), metallic object/coin (13%), cloth (13%), sock (8%), ball (8%), plastic material (8%), peach stone (7%), fishhook (6%), sewing needle (4%), hair tie (4%), pacifier (3%), plant materials (3%) and others (9%). Moreover, the FBs were classified as sharp (13%, n = 9), pointed (33%, n = 24), blunt (26%, n = 19), or linear (28%, n = 20). In this study, 68% of FBs were localised in the stomach, 25% in the intestinal tract (50% duodenum, 28% jejunum, and 22% ileum), and 7% in both the stomach and small intestine. The type of GFB was not significantly associated with age, site or breed. There was a significant association between the type of GFB and sex: if the dog was male, there was a 38% probability of ingesting linear GFBs. The dog survival rate was 100% in cases treated by gastric endoscopic or surgical removal, 94% in cases treated with enterotomy and 33% in cases in which enterectomy was necessary. Enterectomy and multiple surgical sites were associated with a poor outcome. The presence of vomiting for more than 24 h was significantly associated with death.

Safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of an anti- oncostatin M monoclonal antibody in rheumatoid arthritis: results from phase II randomized, placebo-controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: Oncostatin M (OSM) has been implicated in the pathophysiology of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) through its effect on inflammation and joint damage. GSK315234 is a humanised anti-OSM Immunoglobulin G1 (IgG1) monoclonal antibody (mAb). This 3-part study examines the safety, tolerability and efficacy of GSK315234 in patients with active RA. METHOD: This was a 3-part (Parts A, B and C), multicenter study. Part A and Part B were randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Bayesian adaptive dose finding studies to investigate the safety, tolerability, efficacy, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of single (Part A) and 3 repeat (Part B) intravenous infusions of GSK315234 in patients with active RA on a background of methotrexate (MTX). Part C was a single dose, randomised, single-blind, placebo-controlled study to assess subcutaneously administered GSK315234 to patients with active RA on a background of MTX. RESULT: The primary endpoint of the study was mean change in DAS28 at Day 28 in Part A and Day 56 in Part B and C. All patients receiving at least one dose of GSK315234 were included in safety analysis. In Part A, there were statistically significant differences in DAS28 between 3 mg/kg and placebo at Day 56, 84 and 91. There was also a statistically significant difference in DAS28 between 0.3 mg/kg, 3 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg, as compared to placebo, at Day 84. Although these changes were small and occurred late, they supported progression to Part B and C to determine the therapeutic potential of GSK315234. For Part B, no significant difference was observed between 6 mg/kg and placebo. For Part C, a statistically significant difference in DAS28 was observed at Day 40, Day 84 and Day 100 between the 500 mg subcutaneous group, as compared to placebo. No significant findings were observed at any of the time points for EULAR response criteria, ACR20, ACR50 or ACR70. An exploratory analysis of clinical, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics data suggests the lack of efficacy may be due to moderate binding affinity and rapid off-rate of GSK315234 as compared to the higher affinity OSM receptor causing a protein carrier effect prolonging the half life of OSM due to accumulation of the OSM/antibody complex in the serum and synovial fluid. CONCLUSION: Our data highlighted the importance of binding affinity and off-rate effect of a mAb to fully neutralize the target and how this may influence its efficacy and potentially worsen disease activity. Using an anti-OSM mAb with high affinity should test this hypothesis and examine the potential of OSM as a therapeutic target in RA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT00674635.

Ethanol does not alter the pharmacokinetic profile of the controlled-release formulation of carvedilol.

The concomitant ingestion of alcohol may alter the release of a drug from a modified-release dosage form, posing a potential risk to patients. In a randomized, open-label, 4-period cross-over study, the pharmacokinetic profiles of R(+) and S(-) carvedilol were compared after a single oral dose of carvedilol controlled-release formulation (administered following a standard meal) was given alone or concomitantly with ethanol. Thirty-nine healthy subjects participated in this study. Following coadministration of carvedilol controlled-release 40 mg with ethanol (approximately 38 g), ethanol ingestion 2 hours before or 2 hours after carvedilol controlled-release administration, area under the curve for the R(+) and S(-) carvedilol enantiomers was similar compared with carvedilol controlled-release given alone. Carvedilol exposure was not affected by the concomitant administration of ethanol and carvedilol controlled-release. Maximum plasma concentrations for the R(+) and S(-) carvedilol enantiomers were similar except when ethanol was ingested 2 hours after carvedilol controlled-release administration, where there was a modest decrease in maximum plasma concentration for R(+) and S(-) carvedilol (16% and 17%, respectively). Carvedilol controlled-release given alone or concomitantly with ethanol ingestion was generally well tolerated, and no serious or severe adverse events were reported. Ethanol did not alter the pharmacokinetic profile of carvedilol controlled-release.

Pharmacokinetic properties of a new controlled-release formulation of carvedilol.

This review summarizes the pharmacokinetics (PK) of carvedilol after administration of a new once-daily controlled-release (CR) formulation. The plasma concentration-time profiles for both R(+)- and S(-)-carvedilol indicate that carvedilol CR will provide coverage over a 24-hour period similar to the current immediate-release (IR) twice-daily formulation. Exposures for both enantiomers, based on area under the curve (AUC), maximum plasma concentrations (C(max)), and trough concentrations, are equivalent for carvedilol CR compared with carvedilol IR. C(max) and AUC of the enantiomers of carvedilol increase in an approximate dose-proportional manner after administration of carvedilol CR over the dose range of 10-80 mg, indicating that the formulation provides consistent PK performance across the dose strengths proposed for marketing. The intrasubject and intersubject variability of carvedilol CR was comparable to carvedilol IR. For carvedilol CR, mean AUC and C(max) were increased <20% after a high-fat meal compared with a standard meal. The CR and IR formulations of carvedilol exhibited equivalent steady-state PK characteristics in the target hypertension and heart failure populations. The availability of once-daily dosing is expected to improve treatment adherence and thereby enhance the effectiveness of carvedilol in routine clinical use.

Development of a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model for carvedilol to predict beta1-blockade in patients with congestive heart failure.

To determine whether the controlled-release (CR) formulation of carvedilol given once daily provides 24-hour beta1-receptor blockade similar to the currently marketed immediate-release (IR) formulation given twice daily, changes in exercise-induced heart rate after bicycle ergometry were measured. The pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) relation between S(-)-carvedilol concentration-the enantiomer with beta-blocking activity-and change in exercise-induced heart rate was defined in healthy subjects and was best described using a direct effect inhibitory E(max) model (with E(max) being the maximum effect). The population estimates for E(max) and concentration at 50% of the maximum effect (EC50) were 19.2 beats per minute (an approximately 13% maximum decrease in exercise-induced heart rate) and 7.7 ng/mL, respectively. The PK/PD model was used to predict PD effects in patients with mild-to-severe heart failure and in patients after myocardial infarction with left ventricular dysfunction who had received both the IR and CR formulations of carvedilol. In these patients, carvedilol CR had equivalent predicted overall PD (area under the effect curve) and trough (PD(min)) effects compared with carvedilol IR, indicating 24-hour beta-blocking coverage for the new CR formulation of carvedilol given once daily.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic comparison of controlled-release carvedilol and immediate-release carvedilol at steady state in patients with hypertension.

Carvedilol is indicated for the treatment of essential hypertension and mild-to-severe chronic heart failure, as well as the reduction of cardiovascular mortality in clinically stable post-myocardial infarction patients with left ventricular dysfunction. Carvedilol is a racemic mixture of R(+) and S(-) enantiomers that combines beta(1)-, beta(2)-, and alpha(1)-adrenoceptor blockade. For all indications, the immediate-release (IR) formulation of carvedilol is taken twice daily. A controlled-release (CR) formulation of carvedilol that allows once-daily dosing has recently been developed. In this double-blind, parallel-group, crossover study, 122 patients with essential hypertension were randomly allocated to receive low and high doses of carvedilol or placebo. Patients received either a constant low dose (CR 20 mg once daily or IR 6.25 mg twice daily) or were titrated to a high dose (CR 80 mg once daily or IR 25 mg twice daily) before being crossed over to an equivalent dose of the alternative formulation. The pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) profiles were compared between patients receiving carvedilol CR and carvedilol IR. The PK profiles for R(+)- and S(-)-carvedilol for the 2 formulations were equivalent (based on area under the curve, maximum plasma concentration [C(max)], and trough drug concentration). Consistent with an extended-release formulation, carvedilol CR delayed C(max) by 3.5 hours compared with carvedilol IR. For both carvedilol CR and IR, the attenuation of exercise-induced heart rate in patients with hypertension was maintained over the entire 24-hour period, and the 2 formulations demonstrated equivalent beta(1)-blocking effects at trough (end of the dosing interval [PD(min)]), suggesting that the rate of absorption does not interfere with the PD effect. In this first direct comparison of carvedilol CR and IR in subjects with hypertension, fewer adverse events were reported while subjects were receiving carvedilol CR (59.1% overall) compared with carvedilol IR (77.5% overall). This was true regardless of dose received. Headache was the most commonly reported adverse event for subjects receiving either formulation of carvedilol and placebo. Importantly, dizziness and headache were reported less often when subjects received carvedilol CR. This is the first study to show that both formulations had comparable beta(1)-adrenergic blockade in patients with essential hypertension under steady-state conditions. Notably, carvedilol CR provides consistent beta(1)-adrenergic blockade over 24 hours with a once-daily dose.