Effectiveness of Immunization Products Against Medically Attended Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infection: Generic Protocol for a Test-Negative Case-Control Study.

Monitoring the real-life effectiveness of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) products is of major public health importance. This generic protocol for a test-negative design study aims to address currently envisioned approaches for RSV prevention (monoclonal antibodies and vaccines) to study effectiveness of these products among target groups: children, older adults, and pregnant women. The generic protocol approach was chosen to allow for flexibility in adapting the protocol to a specific setting. This protocol includes severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) and acute respiratory infection (ARI), both due to RSV, as end points. These end points can be applied to studies in hospitals, primarily targeting patients with more severe disease, but also to studies in general practitioner clinics targeting ARI.

Real-world effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir versus azvudine in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 during the omicron wave in Beijing: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Two oral antivirals (Nirmatrelvir- ritonavir and Azvudine) are widely used in China practice during the Omicron wave of the pandemic. However, little evidence regarding the real-world effectiveness of these two oral antivirals in in-hospital patients. We aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir versus azvudine among adult hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used data from three Chinese PLA General Hospital medical centres. Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 treated with azvudine or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir from Dec 10, 2022, to February 20, 2023, and did not require invasive ventilation support on admission were eligible for inclusion. RESULTS: After exclusions and propensity-score matching, the final analysis included 486 azvudine recipients and 486 nirmatrelvir-ritonavir recipients. By 28 days of initiation of the antivirus treatment, the crude incidence rate of all-cause death was similar in both types of antivirus treatment (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group 2.8 events 1000 person-days [95% CI, 2.1-3.6] vs azvudine group 3.4 events/1000 person-days [95% CI, 2.6-4.3], P = 0.38). Landmark analysis showed that all-cause death was lower in the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (3.5%) group than the azvudine (6.8%, P = 0.029) within the initial 10-day admission period, while no significant difference was observed for results between 10 and 28 days follow-up. There was no significant difference between the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group and the azvudine group in cumulative incidence of the composite disease progression event (8.6% with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir vs. 10.1% with azvudine, HR, 1.22; 95% CI 0.80-1.86, P = 0.43). CONCLUSION: Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 during the omicron wave in Beijing, similar in-hospital clinical outcomes on 28 days were observed between patients receiving nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and azvudine. However, it is worth noticing that nirmatrelvir-ritonavir appears to hold an advantage over azvudine in reducing early mortality. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to verify the efficacy of those two antivirus medications especially in early treatment.

Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections among recipients of tixagevimab-cilgavimab prophylaxis: A citywide real-world effectiveness study.

There are limited real-world data on the effectiveness of tixagevimab-cilgavimab as pre-exposure prophylaxis of COVID-19. We describe lessons learned when coordinating data collection and identifying breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections among patients across indications and institutions in a major US city. The Chicago Department of Public Health requested patient-level tixagevimab-cilgavimab administration data from all prescribing providers in Chicago, for treatments December 8, 2021 through June 30, 2022. Records were matched to COVID-19 vaccinations and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections through December 31, 2022. Due to difficulty collecting data from all providers, targeted follow-up was conducted to improve completeness on key variables (demographics, vaccination status, clinical indication for prophylaxis). Over half of reported tixagevimab-cilgavimab administrations were to patients residing outside Chicago. Five hundred forty-four Chicago residents who received at least one dose of tixagevimab-cilgavimab were included in this analysis. Most were age 50 years or older (72%), Black non-Latinx (33%) or White non-Latinx (29%), and fully vaccinated (80%). Seventy-five patients (14%) had laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. Patients with and without breakthrough infections were demographically similar. Clinical indication was missing for >95% of cases, improved to 64% after follow-up; the most frequently specified was hematologic malignancy (10%). Severe outcomes were uncommon: 16% had documented COVID-19-related hospitalizations, one death was identified. Tixagevimab-cilgavimab recipients in Chicago had a lower rate of severe SARS-CoV-2 infection than reported among other untreated high-risk patients, including during predominance of non-neutralizing variants. Improving stakeholder collaboration is essential for generation of real-world effectiveness data, informing pandemic preparedness and optimizing use of medical countermeasures.

The patient perspective on dose optimization for anticancer treatments: A new era of cancer drug dosing-Challenging the "more is better" dogma.

The Patient-Centered Dosing Initiative, a patient-led effort advocating for a paradigm shift in determining cancer drug dosing strategies, pioneers a departure from traditional oncology drug dosing practices. Historically, oncology drug dosing relies on identifying the maximum tolerated dose through phase 1 dose escalation methodology, favoring higher dosing for greater efficacy, often leading to higher toxicity. However, this approach is not universally applicable, especially for newer treatments like targeted therapies and immunotherapies. Patient-Centered Dosing Initiative challenges this "more is better" ethos, particularly as metastatic breast cancer patients themselves, as they not only seek longevity but also a high quality of life since most metastatic breast cancer patients stay on treatment for the rest of their lives. Surveying 1221 metastatic breast cancer patients and 119 oncologists revealed an evident need for flexible dosing strategies, advocating personalized care discussions based on patient attributes. The survey results also demonstrated an openness toward flexible dosing and a willingness from both patients and clinicians to discuss dosing as part of their care. Patient-centered dosing emphasizes dialogue between clinicians and patients, delving into treatment efficacy-toxicity trade-offs. Similarly, clinical trial advocacy for multiple dosing regimens encourages adaptive strategies, moving away from strict adherence to maximum tolerated dose, supported by recent research in optimizing drug dosages. Recognizing the efficacy-effectiveness gap between clinical trials and real-world practice, Patient-Centered Dosing Initiative underscores the necessity for patient-centered dosing strategies. A focus on individual patient attributes aligns with initiatives like Project Optimus and Project Renewal, aiming to optimize drug dosages for improved treatment outcomes at both the pre- and post-approval phases. Patient-Centered Dosing Initiative's efforts extend to patient education, providing tools to initiate dosage-related conversations with physicians. In addition, it emphasizes physician-patient dialogues and post-marketing studies as essential in determining optimal dosing and refining drug regimens. A dose-finding paradigm prioritizing drug safety, tolerability, and efficacy benefits all stakeholders, reducing emergency care needs and missed treatments for patients, aligning with oncologists' and patients' shared goals. Importantly, it represents a win-win scenario across healthcare sectors. In summary, the Patient-Centered Dosing Initiative drives transformative changes in cancer drug dosing, emphasizing patient well-being and personalized care, aiming to enhance treatment outcomes and optimize oncology drug delivery.

Effectiveness of oral semaglutide on glucose control and body weight up to 18 months: a multicenter retrospective real-world study.

AIM: Oral semaglutide, an innovative orally administered GLP-1 receptor agonist for type 2 diabetes (T2D) management was herein evaluated for its effectiveness in a multi-center retrospective real-world study. METHODS: We included new-users of oral semaglutide from 18 specialist care centres and collected retrospective data on baseline clinical characteristics. Updated values of HbA1c and body weight were analyzed using the mixed model for repeated measures. RESULTS: The study included 166 individuals with T2D, predominantly men (64.5%), with a mean age of 64.4 years and a mean diabetes duration of 10.1 years. In the majority of patients (68.3%) oral semaglutide was used as a second-line drug, mostly with metformin. At baseline, mean BMI was 28.9 kg/m2 and HbA1c was 7.5%. During the 18-month observation period, oral semaglutide demonstrated significant reductions in HbA1c, with a maximum change of - 0.9%, and 42.1% of patients achieved HbA1c values below 7.0%. Additionally, there was a substantial reduction in body weight, with an estimated change of - 3.4 kg at 18 months, and 30.3% of patients experienced a 5% or greater reduction in baseline body weight. Only 24.2% of patients reached the 14 mg dose. Subgroup analysis revealed that baseline HbA1c > 7%, persistence on drug, not being on a prior therapy with DPP-4 inhibitors, and loosing 5% or more the initial body weight were associated with greater HbA1c reductions. CONCLUSION: This study supports oral semaglutide as an effective option for T2D treatment, offering improved glucose control and weight management in a real-world setting.

A Lesson of Immunosuppression in Renal Transplant: Retreat or Hold?

Background: Aiming at understanding whether there are cases of near-tolerance among long-term surviving kidney transplant recipients in our center, or even operant tolerance can be attempted based on their immune status, we analyzed changes of immune cell subsets and cytokines in various groups, and evaluated immune status of long-term survival recipients. Methods: A real-world, observational, retrospective cohort study was conducted in our hospital. Twenty-eight long-term recipients were selected as study subjects, 15 recent postoperative stable recipients, and 15 healthy subjects as controls. T and B lymphocyte subsets, MDSCs, and cytokines were detected and analyzed. Results: Treg/CD4 T cells, total B and B10 cells in long-term and recent renal recipients were lower than healthy controls (HC). The level of IFN-γ and IL-17A in long-term survival patients was obviously higher than that in recent postoperative stable recipients and HC, while TGF-ß1 level was significantly lower in long-term survival group than in short-term postoperative group and HC. Notably, compared with short-term recipients, it has been found that the IL-6 level in both positive and negative HLA groups were obviously lower (all P<0.05). In the long-term survival group, 43% of recipients were positive for urinary protein and 50% were positive for HLA antibody. Conclusion: This "real-world" study validates the findings of real status of long-term survival recipients observed in clinical trials. Contrary to a state of proper tolerance as expected, the group recipients in long-term survival were accompanied by the increased indicators of immune response, while those related to immune tolerance were not significantly increased. Long-term survival recipients with stable renal function may be in an immune equilibrium state where immunosuppression and rejection coexist under the action of low-intensity immune agents. If immunosuppressive agents are reduced or even removed, rejection may occur.

Intravitreal fluocinolone acetonide 0.19 mg (ILUVIEN®) in patients with non-infectious uveitis: real-world effectiveness and safety outcomes at 12 months.

PURPOSE: This study assessed the effectiveness of the 0.19-mg fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) implant by multimodal measurements in patients with non-infectious uveitis (NIU) in a real-world setting in Spain. METHODS: A prospective study of patients who had NIU including uveitic macular oedema (UME) with ≥ 12 months follow-up was done. Exclusion criteria include infectious uveitis and uncontrolled glaucoma or ocular hypertension requiring more than 2 medications. Effectiveness was assessed using a multicomponent outcome measure that included nine outcomes. Effectiveness was defined as all components being met at every timepoint. Secondary outcome measures were onset or progression of glaucoma and investigator-reported adverse events. RESULTS: Twenty-six eyes from 22 patients were included, with 96.2% having an indication including UME. During the 12-month study, the FAc implant was effective in 15 (57.7%) eyes, reaching effectiveness as soon as 2 weeks post-implantation. Mean best-corrected visual acuity and mean central macular thickness (CMT) were significantly improved vs. baseline at all timepoints (all comparisons p < 0.01). During the 12-month study, inflammation markers (anterior chamber cells and vitreous haze) had also significantly declined. Factors predicting effectiveness at month 12 were systemic corticosteroid dose pre-FAc, higher immunomodulatory therapy (IMT) load at baseline and thicker retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) at baseline (all p < 0.05). Factors predicting failure were male gender, thinner RNFL at baseline and treatment ineffectiveness at 1 month (all p < 0.05). In parallel, corticosteroid and IMT use also declined significantly. No significant increase in IOP was detected. CONCLUSION: The FAc implant is safe and effective at treating NIU over 12 months in a real-world setting in Spain.

The real-world effectiveness and safety of perampanel in Europe: A scoping review.

In order to characterize the real-world effectiveness and safety of perampanel during clinical use in Europe, we conducted a structured literature search and scoping review of real-world studies conducted in Europe in adolescents (aged ≥ 12 years) or adults who were prescribed perampanel for focal epilepsy or primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures in the context of idiopathic generalized epilepsy, published between January 2016 and July 2021. We identified 29 relevant studies (20 retrospective and 9 prospective) in 3608 patients; median study duration was 12 months. Most patients (76.1%) were receiving two or more antiseizure drugs (ASDs) when perampanel was initiated. The maintenance perampanel dose ranged from 2 to 16 mg/day (most commonly 6 mg/day). Retention rate at 12 months ranged from 46% to 90.5% (median 71.1%). The proportion of patients who were free of seizures during perampanel ranged from 1.8% to 84.6%, but were consistently below 20% in studies where patients had received an average of ≥5 prior ASDs and above 20% where patients had received an average of <5 prior ASDs. The proportion of patients who achieved ≥50% reduction in seizures during perampanel ranged from 20.0% to 85.7%. Across all studies, the incidence of adverse events (AEs) ranged from 18.2% to 67.4% (median 37.1%) and discontinuation due to AEs from 6.2% to 56% (median 12.5%). Discontinuation rates tended to be higher in UK studies than in studies from Italy or Spain. The most commonly reported individual AEs were dizziness/vertigo (median incidence 13.7%), somnolence (median 11.9%), aggression (median 9.8%), irritability (median 9.1%), and cognitive deficits (median 7.0%). There was no relationship between the overall rate of AEs and perampanel dose, perampanel plasma levels, or number of concomitant medications. Our global overview of European observational studies with perampanel provides evidence that this agent is effective and safe in clinical practice in a range of countries, patients, and settings.

Real-world effectiveness of vortioxetine in outpatients with major depressive disorder: functioning and dose effects.

BACKGROUND: Functional recovery is an important treatment goal in major depressive disorder (MDD). This study assessed the real-world effectiveness of vortioxetine in patients with MDD, with particular focus on functioning; dose-response was also assessed. METHODS: This was a non-interventional, prospective, multicenter study conducted in Greece. Adult outpatients with MDD (n = 336) initiating vortioxetine (5-20 mg/day flexible dosing) as treatment for a current major depressive episode were followed for 3 months. Analyses were stratified according to vortioxetine dosage at 3 months: 5-10 mg/day versus 15-20 mg/day. Functioning was assessed using the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS). RESULTS: Mean ± standard error SDS total score decreased (improved) from 18.7 ± 0.3 at baseline to 12.9 ± 0.3 after 1 month of vortioxetine treatment and 7.8 ± 0.4 after 3 months (p < 0.001 vs. baseline for all comparisons). Functional recovery (SDS score ≤ 6) was achieved in 14.6% of patients after 1 month of treatment and 48.4% of patients after 3 months. Improvement from baseline in SDS total and domain scores at 3 months was more pronounced in patients receiving vortioxetine 15-20 mg/day than in those receiving vortioxetine 5-10 mg/day. The mean ± standard error change in SDS total score from baseline was 9.2 ± 0.8 in the 5-10 mg/day group and 12.1 ± 0.4 in the 15-20 mg/day group (p < 0.001). Limitations of this study include its non-interventional study design and lack of a control group or active comparator. CONCLUSIONS: Statistically significant and clinically relevant improvements in functioning were seen in patients with MDD treated with vortioxetine in a real-world setting. Higher doses of vortioxetine were associated with significantly greater improvements in functioning.

Real-world clinical outcomes of treatment with casirivimab-imdevimab among patients with mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 during the Delta variant pandemic.

Background: Mutations of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) may reduce the efficacy of neutralizing monoclonal antibody therapy against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We here evaluated the efficacy of casirivimab-imdevimab in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 during the Delta variant surge in Fukushima Prefecture, Japan. Methods: We enrolled 949 patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 who were admitted to hospital between July 24, 2021 and September 30, 2021. Clinical deterioration after admission was compared between casirivimab-imdevimab users (n = 314) and non-users (n = 635). Results: The casirivimab-imdevimab users were older (P < 0.0001), had higher body temperature (≥ 38°C) (P < 0.0001) and greater rates of history of cigarette smoking (P = 0.0068), hypertension (P = 0.0004), obesity (P < 0.0001), and dyslipidemia (P < 0.0001) than the non-users. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that receiving casirivimab-imdevimab was an independent factor for preventing deterioration (odds ratio 0.448; 95% confidence interval 0.263-0.763; P = 0.0023). Furthermore, in 222 patients who were selected from each group after matching on the propensity score, deterioration was significantly lower among those receiving casirivimab-imdevimab compared to those not receiving casirivimab-imdevimab (7.66% vs 14.0%; p = 0.021). Conclusion: This real-world study demonstrates that casirivimab-imdevimab contributes to the prevention of deterioration in COVID-19 patients after hospitalization during a Delta variant surge.

Observational cohort study of rilpivirine (RPV) utilization in Europe.

INTRODUCTION: Data on safety and effectiveness of RPV from the real-world setting as well as comparisons with other NNRTIs such as efavirenz (EFV) remain scarce. METHODS: Participants of EuroSIDA were included if they had started a RPV- or an EFV-containing regimen over November 2011-December 2017. Statistical testing was conducted using non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test and Chi-square test. A logistic regression model was used to compare participants' characteristics by treatment group. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate the cumulative risk of virological failure (VF, two consecutive values > 50 copies/mL). RESULTS: 1,355 PLWH who started a RPV-based regimen (11% ART-naïve), as well as 333 initiating an EFV-containing regimen were included. Participants who started RPV differed from those starting EFV for demographics (age, geographical region) and immune-virological profiles (CD4 count, HIV RNA). The cumulative risk of VF for the RPV-based group was 4.5% (95% CI 3.3-5.7%) by 2 years from starting treatment (71 total VF events). Five out of 15 (33%) with resistance data available in the RPV group showed resistance-associated mutations vs. 3/13 (23%) among those in the EFV group. Discontinuations due to intolerance/toxicity were reported for 73 (15%) of RPV- vs. 45 (30%) of EFV-treated participants (p = 0.0001). The main difference was for toxicity of central nervous system (CNS, 3% vs. 22%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our estimates of VF > 50 copies/mL and resistance in participants treated with RPV were similar to those reported by other studies. RPV safety profile was favourable with less frequent discontinuation due to toxicity than EFV (especially for CNS).

Real-world effectiveness of fremanezumab in migraine patients initiating treatment in the United States: results from a retrospective chart study.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and tolerability of fremanezumab, a fully humanized monoclonal antibody (IgG2Δa) that selectively targets calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and is approved for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults, have been demonstrated in randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. Real-world data can further support those clinical trial data and demonstrate the full clinical benefits of fremanezumab. This chart review assessed the effectiveness of fremanezumab for improving clinical outcomes in adult patients with migraine treated according to real-world clinical practice. METHODS: This retrospective, panel-based, online physician chart review study used electronic case report forms with US physicians. Patient inclusion criteria were a physician diagnosis of migraine, fremanezumab treatment initiation at ≥ 18 years of age after US Food and Drug Administration approval, ≥ 1 dose of fremanezumab treatment, and ≥ 2 assessments of monthly migraine days (MMD; 1 within 30 days before treatment initiation and ≥ 1 after initiation). Changes from baseline in MMD, monthly headache days (MHD), and Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) and 6-item Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) scores were assessed over 6 months. These endpoints were evaluated in the overall population and subgroups divided by dosing schedule and number of prior migraine preventive treatment failures. RESULTS: This study included data from 421 clinicians and 1003 patients. Mean age at fremanezumab initiation was 39.7 years, and most patients were female (75.8%). In the overall population, mean baseline MMD and MHD were 12.7 and 14.0, respectively. Mean (percent) reductions from baseline in MMD and MHD, respectively, were - 4.6 (36.2%) and - 4.7 (33.6%) at Month 1, - 6.7 (52.8%) and - 6.8 (48.6%) at Month 3, and - 9.2 (72.4%) and - 9.8 (70.0%) at Month 6. Mean (percent) reductions from baseline in MIDAS and HIT-6 scores also increased over the 6-month study period, from - 6.2 (21.6%) and - 8.4 (14.0%) at Month 1 to - 18.1 (63.1%) and - 16.2 (27.0%) at Month 6, respectively. Improvements in these outcomes over 6 months were observed across all evaluated subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: This real-world study demonstrated effectiveness of fremanezumab treatment for up to 6 months, irrespective of dosing regimen or number of prior migraine preventive treatment failures, reflecting ongoing, clinically meaningful improvements in patient outcomes.

Real-world effectiveness after initiating fremanezumab treatment in US patients with episodic and chronic migraine or difficult-to-treat migraine.

BACKGROUND: Fremanezumab, a fully humanized monoclonal antibody (mAb; IgG2Δa) that selectively targets calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), is approved for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults. The efficacy and safety of fremanezumab for migraine prevention have been demonstrated in randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. Real-world effectiveness data are needed to complement clinical trial data. This study assessed the effectiveness of fremanezumab across different subgroups of adult patients with episodic migraine (EM), chronic migraine (CM), or difficult-to-treat (DTT) migraine in real-world clinical settings. METHODS: This retrospective, panel-based online chart review used electronic case report forms. Patient inclusion criteria were a physician diagnosis of EM or CM; age ≥ 18 years at the time of first fremanezumab initiation; ≥ 1 dose of fremanezumab treatment; ≥ 1 follow-up visit since first initiation; and ≥ 2 measurements of monthly migraine days (MMD; with 1 within a month before or at first initiation and ≥ 1 after first initiation). Changes in MMD and monthly headache days were assessed during the follow-up period. These endpoints were evaluated in subgroups of patients by migraine type (EM/CM) and in subgroups with DTT migraine (diagnosis of medication overuse [MO], major depressive disorder [MDD], generalized anxiety disorder [GAD], or prior exposure to a different CGRP pathway-targeted mAb [CGRP mAb]). RESULTS: Data were collected from 421 clinicians and 1003 patients. Mean (percent) reductions from baseline in MMD at Month 6 were - 7.7 (77.0%) in EM patients, - 10.1 (68.7%) in CM patients, - 10.8 (80.6%) in the MO subgroup, - 9.9 (68.3%) in the MDD subgroup, - 9.5 (66.4%) in the GAD subgroup, and - 9.0 (68.7%) in the prior CGRP mAb exposure subgroup. Improvements in MDD or GAD severity were reported by 45.5% and 45.8% of patients with comorbid MDD or GAD, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world study, fremanezumab demonstrated effectiveness for migraine regardless of migraine type or the presence of factors contributing to DTT migraine (MO, GAD, MDD, or prior exposure to a different CGRP mAb).

Effectiveness of Direct-acting Antivirals for the Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis C in Rwanda: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) are becoming accessible in sub-Saharan Africa. This study examined the effectiveness of DAAs in patients treated through the Rwandan national health system and identified factors associated with treatment outcomes. METHODS: This retrospective study used data from the national hepatitis C virus (HCV) program for patients who initiated DAAs between November 2015 and March 2017. Sustained virological response at 12 weeks after treatment (SVR12) was the primary outcome. Logistic regression models were fit to estimate the relationship between patients' clinical and demographic characteristics and treatment outcome. RESULTS: 894 patients started treatment during the study period; 590 completed treatment and had SVR12 results. Among the 304 patients without SVR12 results, 48 were lost to follow-up and 256 had no SVR12 results but clinical data indicated they likely completed treatment; these patients were classified as nonvirological failure because viral clearance could not be determined. In a per-protocol analysis of 590 patients with SVR12 results, SVR12 was achieved in 540 (92%), and virological failure occurred in 50 (8%). Pretreatment HCV RNA above the median split was associated with virological failure. Intention-to-treat analyses including all patients showed that SVR12 was achieved in 540 (60%), with nonvirological failure in 304 (34%) and virological failure in 50 (6%). Patients in Western Province were more likely to experience nonvirological failure than patients in Kigali, likely owing to the 5-7-hour travel required to access testing and treatment. CONCLUSIONS: DAAs were effective when implemented through the Rwandan national health system. Decentralization and enhanced financing are underway in Rwanda, which could improve access to treatment and follow-up as the country prepares for HCV elimination.

An Italian, multicenter, real-world, retrospective study of first-line pazopanib in unselected metastatic renal-cell carcinoma patients: the 'Pamerit' study.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the current immunotherapy era, VEGFR inhibitors maintain effectiveness in metastatic renal cell cancer. Real-world data concerning pazopanib are limited. The aim of this study is to add information about efficacy and safety of pazopanib as first-line treatment in metastatic renal cell cancer patients not enrolled into clinical trials. METHODS: Retrospective analysis (the PAMERIT study) of first-line pazopanib in real-world metastatic renal cell cancer patients among 39 Centers in Italy. Outcomes were progression-free survival, overall survival, objective response rate and treatment-related adverse events. Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank test and multivariable Cox's models were used and adjusted for age, histology, previous renal surgery, International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium score and pazopanib initial dose. RESULTS: Among 474 patients, 87.3% had clear cell metastatic renal cell cancer histology. Most of them (84.6%) had upfront renal surgery. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 15.8 and 34.4 months, respectively, significantly correlating with International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium's good prognosis (P < 0.001), ECOG PS 0 (P < 0.001), age (<75 years, P = 0.005), surgery (P < 0.001) and response to pazopanib (P < 0.001). After 3 months of pazopanib, overall disease control rate have been observed in 76.6% patients. Among International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium's favorable group patients, 57/121 (47%) showed complete/partial response. No unexpected AEs emerged. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world study, metastatic renal cell cancer patients treated with first-line pazopanib reached greater progression-free survival and overall survival than in pivotal studies and had high response rates when belonging to International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium's favorable group, without new toxicities. Pazopanib has been confirmed a valid first-line option for International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium's good prognosis metastatic renal cell cancer patients who cannot be submitted to immunotherapy.

Real-world effectiveness and tolerability of erenumab: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to systematically assess the effectiveness and tolerability of erenumab in a clinical setting, specifically a tertiary headache center. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study at the John Graham Headache Center of Brigham and Women's Hospital. All patients who received erenumab from a headache specialist at the Center from 17 May 2018 to 31 January 2019 were included. Patients were contacted and underwent a structured clinical interview including information about erenumab use, perceived benefit, adverse events (AEs), and a global assessment of benefit versus drawbacks. Chart review was performed for patients who could not be contacted. RESULTS: Four hundred and forty-four patients were initially identified and 418 were eligible. Two hundred and ninety-five participants completed the structured clinical interview portion of the study (response rate 70.6%). Seventy-four patient charts were additionally reviewed. Two hundred and forty-one participants had used erenumab. One hundred and sixty nine (70%) of participants experienced at least one adverse event, with constipation (43%), injection site reaction (24%), fatigue (15%), worsening headache (12%), and dizziness (11%) the five most commonly reported AEs. One hundred and sixty-eight participants (69.7%) felt that the benefits of erenumab outweighed any drawbacks. One hundred and fifty-one participants (62.7%) planned to continue using erenumab. Cost of treatment was cited by 12% of participants as a reason for either not starting or for stopping erenumab. Of patients who had an increase in dose due to lack of or partial efficacy, 46.5% felt that the dose increase was helpful. We identified one case of unintended pregnancy in our study population. CONCLUSIONS: This large "real-world" study validates the findings of benefit of erenumab observed in clinical trials. Although adverse events were far more common in this population than in clinical trials, the planned continuation rate was relatively high. The substantial discrepancy between adverse events seen in clinical practice compared with clinical trials suggests systematic differences between clinical trial participants and patients who receive the treatment in clinical practice, or may indicate suboptimal ascertainment of adverse events in the trials. Clinicians should continue to be vigilant for adverse events in clinical practice.

Rates of sustained virological response 12 weeks after the scheduled end of direct-acting antiviral (DAA)-based hepatitis C virus (HCV) therapy from the National German HCV registry: does HIV coinfection impair the response to DAA combination therapy?

OBJECTIVES: The European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) treatment recommendations for hepatitis C no longer discriminate between HIV/hepatitis C virus (HCV)-coinfected and HCV-monoinfected patients. However, recent data from Spain are questioning these recommendations on the basis of the findings of higher relapse rates and lower cure rates in HIV/HCV-infected subjects. The aim of our study was to compare HCV cure rates in monoinfected and coinfected patients from Germany. METHODS: Data acquired from the Deutsches Hepatitis C-Registry were analysed. A total of 5657 HCV-monoinfected subjects and 488 HIV/HCV-coinfected patients were included in the study. Rates of sustained virological response 12 weeks after the scheduled end of therapy (SVR12) were collected in both subgroups and in cirrhotic and noncirrhotic patients. RESULTS: HIV/HCV-coinfected patients were more frequently male (84.6% vs. 56.4%, respectively; P < 0.001) and younger than HCV-monoinfected subjects (46.5 ± 9 vs. 53.8 ± 12.5 years, respectively; P < 0.001). The CD4 blood cell count was > 350 cells/µL in 63.1% of HIV-positive subjects and 88.7% were on antiretroviral therapy. SVR12 rates were 90.3% (5111 of 5657) in our HCV-monoinfected cohort and 91.2% (445 of 488) in our coinfected patients. Liver cirrhosis was confirmed in 1667 of 5657 (29.5%) monoinfected patients and 84 of 488 (17.2%; P < 0.001) coinfected patients. SVR12 rates did not differ between HCV-monoinfected and HIV/HCV-coinfected patients with liver cirrhosis (87.8% vs. 89.3%, respectively; P = 0.864). A treatment duration of 8 weeks did not reduce the percentage of patients with SVR12 in either subgroup (93.7% in both groups). CONCLUSIONS: We found high SVR12 rates in monoinfected as well as coinfected individuals. No differences were detected between the two subgroups regardless of whether there was accompanying liver cirrhosis or a shortened treatment duration.

Measuring the impact of medicines regulatory interventions - Systematic review and methodological considerations.

AIMS: Evaluating the public health impact of regulatory interventions is important but there is currently no common methodological approach to guide this evaluation. This systematic review provides a descriptive overview of the analytical methods for impact research. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for articles with an empirical analysis evaluating the impact of European Union or non-European Union regulatory actions to safeguard public health published until March 2017. References from systematic reviews and articles from other known sources were added. Regulatory interventions, data sources, outcomes of interest, methodology and key findings were extracted. RESULTS: From 1246 screened articles, 229 were eligible for full-text review and 153 articles in English language were included in the descriptive analysis. Over a third of articles studied analgesics and antidepressants. Interventions most frequently evaluated are regulatory safety communications (28.8%), black box warnings (23.5%) and direct healthcare professional communications (10.5%); 55% of studies measured changes in drug utilization patterns, 27% evaluated health outcomes, and 18% targeted knowledge, behaviour or changes in clinical practice. Unintended consequences like switching therapies or spill-over effects were rarely evaluated. Two-thirds used before-after time series and 15.7% before-after cross-sectional study designs. Various analytical approaches were applied including interrupted time series regression (31.4%), simple descriptive analysis (28.8%) and descriptive analysis with significance tests (23.5%). CONCLUSION: Whilst impact evaluation of pharmacovigilance and product-specific regulatory interventions is increasing, the marked heterogeneity in study conduct and reporting highlights the need for scientific guidance to ensure robust methodologies are applied and systematic dissemination of results occurs.

High treatment persistence rate and significant endoscopic healing among real-life patients treated with vedolizumab - a Finnish Nationwide Inflammatory Bowel Disease Cohort Study (FINVEDO).

OBJECTIVES: The efficacy and tolerability of vedolizumab in the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) has been demonstrated in an extensive GEMINI clinical trial programme. Clinical trials represent highly selected patient populations and, therefore, it is important to demonstrate effectiveness in real-life clinical practice. We set out to assess real-world treatment outcomes of vedolizumab in a nationwide cohort of treatment refractory Finnish Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) patients. METHODS: This was a nationwide, retrospective, non-interventional, multi-centre chart review study. All adult patients from 27 Finnish gastroenterology centers with a diagnosis of UC or CD who had at least one vedolizumab infusion since the availability of the product in Finland, were included in the study. Data were collected retrospectively from medical charts at baseline, week 14, and month 6. The primary outcome measure was treatment persistence 24 weeks post-vedolizumab initiation. RESULTS: A total of 247 patients were included (108 CD, 139 UC). A total of 75.0% (n = 81) of all CD patients and 66.2% (n = 92) of all UC patients, were persistent on vedolizumab therapy for 6 months post treatment initiation. At month 6, 41.8% (28/67) of the treatment persistent CD patients and 73.3% (63/86) of the treatment persistent UC patients achieved clinical remission. Significant improvement in endoscopic scores were observed among treatment persistent patients (CD, n = 17, ΔSES-CD=-5.5, p = .008; UC, n = 26, ΔMayo endoscopic score =-0.5, p = .003) at month 6. CONCLUSIONS: Vedolizumab provides an effective and well-tolerated treatment option in real-world clinical practice even among treatment refractory IBD patients.

Validity and generalizability of findings of randomized controlled trials on arthroscopic partial meniscectomy of the knee.

The validity and generalizability of evidence from trials on arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) for a ruptured meniscus of the knee has been debated in scientific journals. The aim of this paper was to assess the validity and generalizability of evidence for trials on effectiveness of APM by a novel Benchmarking method; to compare this assessment with established assessment methods; and to make an overall assessment of the current evidence on validity and generalizability of findings. Literature search was undertaken to find all randomized controlled trials. The benchmarking method, the Cochrane method for the assessment of validity of RCTs, and CONSORT method for the assessment of generalizability of findings were used. The data were extracted and checked for accuracy twice. Seven RCTs were found, of which 2 were double blinded. The benchmarking method indicated that only one trial, assessing real-world effectiveness, had recruited patients comprehensively from the catchment area and showed clinically important effectiveness for APM. All trials had deficiencies in reporting of baseline characteristics and adherence to interventions. In 5 trials, the crossover to surgery from conservative treatment arm was between 19 and 36 percent. The benchmarking method indicates that APM may be an effective treatment for meticulously selected patients, or when APM is targeted to those patients who do not respond to the conservative treatment. There is a need for more sham-controlled and real-world effectiveness trials reporting comprehensively patient characteristics and adherence to interventions, preferably in a representative sample of patients living in the recruitment area.