Efficacy and safety of dupilumab up to 52 weeks in adults and adolescents with eosinophilic oesophagitis (LIBERTY EoE TREET study): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Long-term management options that specifically target the underlying inflammation in eosinophilic oesophagitis are needed. Dupilumab blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin (IL)-4/IL-13; we aimed to assess its long-term efficacy and safety in adults and adolescents with eosinophilic oesophagitis enrolled in part B of the LIBERTY EoE TREET study who continued to part C (part B-C). METHODS: LIBERTY EoE TREET was a three-part, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study conducted at 65 hospitals and private clinics across ten countries in Australia, Canada, Europe, and the USA. Adults or adolescents (aged ≥12 years) with a diagnosis of eosinophilic oesophagitis by endoscopic biopsy (peak oesophageal intraepithelial eosinophil count ≥15 eosinophils per high-power field [eos/hpf]) from at least one oesophageal region despite 8 weeks of high-dose proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) and a Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ) score of at least 10 at baseline were eligible. In part B, patients were randomly (1:1:1) assigned to receive subcutaneous dupilumab 300 mg either weekly or every 2 weeks or weekly placebo until week 24. Randomisation was done centrally by interactive voice response system/web response system (IVRS/IWRS) in blocks and stratified according to age (<18 years vs ≥18 years) and use of PPI at randomisation (yes vs no). Patients, study sponsors, and investigators involved in the study were masked to the randomisation outcome. Eligible patients who received placebo in part B and continued to part C were randomly assigned again (1:1) to either weekly dupilumab (placebo/weekly dupilumab group) or dupilumab every 2 weeks (placebo/dupilumab every 2 weeks), with matching placebo alternating with dupilumab doses. Patients who were randomly assigned to one of the dupilumab dose regimens in part B remained on the same regimen in part C for an additional 28 weeks (weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group or dupilumab every 2 weeks/dupilumab every 2 weeks group). Treatment assignment in part C was managed by IVRS/IWRS to maintain blinding of treatment assignment in part B. The primary endpoint of this trial has been reported; here, we report the week 52 outcomes of part B-C. Efficacy and safety analyses were done in the part C safety-analysis set, which included all patients who were randomised in part B, entered part C, and received any study drug in part C. This completed trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03633617. FINDINGS: Between Aug 12, 2019, and March 11, 2021, 240 patients were randomly assigned into part B, of whom 227 (74 in placebo group, 74 in weekly dupilumab group, and 79 in dupilumab every 2 weeks group) continued into part B-C and were included in the current analysis. 37 patients switched from placebo to weekly dupilumab, and 37 from placebo to dupilumab every 2 weeks; 74 patients continued on weekly dupilumab and 79 continued on dupilumab every 2 weeks. Of the patients who entered part B-C, 75 (33%) were adolescents, 145 (64%) male, 82 (36%) female, and 206 (91%) White. At week 52, 55 (85%) patients in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group, 25 (68%) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group, 54 (74%) in the every 2 weeks dupilumab/every 2 weeks dupilumab group, and 23 (72%) in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group achieved a peak oesophageal intraepithelial eosinophil count of 6 eos/hpf or less. Mean percent change from part B baseline in peak eosinophil count was -95·9% (95% CI -96·9 to -94·9) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group, -84·2% (-98·3 to -70·2) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group, -84·8% (-94·3 to -75·2) in the every 2 weeks dupilumab/every 2 weeks dupilumab group, and -91·2% (-95·9 to -86·5) in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group at week 52. At week 52, mean change from part B baseline in eosinophilic oesophagitis Histology Scoring System (HSS) grade score was -1·0 point (95% CI -1·1 to -0·9) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group and -0·9 points (-1·0 to -0·8) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group; mean change in eosinophilic oesophagitis HSS stage score was -0·9 points (-1·0 to -0·8) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group and -0·9 points (-1·0 to -0·8) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group. Similar improvements were observed in the every 2 weeks dupilumab groups. Mean absolute change from part B baseline in DSQ score was -30·3 points (95% CI -34·5 to -26·1) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group, -27·3 points (-32·1 to -22·4) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group, -20·9% (-25·4 to -16·3) in the every 2 weeks dupilumab/every 2 weeks dupilumab group, and -23·7% (-29·1 to -18·3) in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group at week 52. Mean change from part B baseline in endoscopic reference score was -5·4 points (95% CI -6·1 to -4·6) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group, -6·1 points (-7·3 to -4·9) in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group, -5·2% (-6·0 to -4·4) in the every 2 weeks dupilumab/every 2 weeks dupilumab group, and -4·3% (-5·4 to -3·1) in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group at week 52. During part B-C, one (3%) patient in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group, one (1%) in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group, and one (3%) in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group received rescue medication. One (3%) patient in the placebo/every 2 weeks dupilumab group and one (1%) in the dupilumab every 2 weeks/dupilumab every 2 weeks group underwent a rescue oesophageal dilation procedure. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were injection-site reactions (ten [14%] in the weekly dupilumab/weekly dupilumab group and four [11%] in the placebo/weekly dupilumab group). INTERPRETATION: Improvements in histological, symptomatic, endoscopic, and molecular features of eosinophilic oesophagitis observed after 24 weeks of weekly dupilumab treatment were maintained or continued to improve to week 52. These findings reinforce the importance of weekly dupilumab, rather than every 2 weeks, for the improvement of symptoms in adults and adolescents with eosinophilic oesophagitis. FUNDING: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Estudo multicêntrico de pacientes submetidos a implante de cardioversor-desfibrilador implantável (CDI) na America Latina / Multi-center study of patients who underwent implants of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) in Latin America / Estudio multicéntrico de pacientes sometidos a implante de cardioversor-desfibrilador implantable(CDI) en Latinoamérica

O ICD Register da Medtronic foi introduzido na América Latina com a finalidade de coletar dados relacionados à indicação de implantes de CDI para prevenção primária e secundária de morte súbita e ao acompanhamento de pacientes originários de Porto Rico, Caribe. México e América do Sul. Além dessa ampla variedade geográfica, também foram incluídos detalhes referentes aos cuidados de saúde recebidos como parte do tratamento. O presente estudo apresenta as características de desfecho de 910 portadores de cardiopatias tratados para prevenção primária, em comparação com aqueles nos quais o implante destinou-se à prevenção secundária.

The ICD Register was introduced to Latin America to collect data related to implant indication of ICD for the prevention of primary and secondary deaths and for the follow-up of patients from Puerto Rico, the Caribbean, Mexico and South America. In addition to this vast geographic variety, information related to the health care as part of the treatment has also been included. This study shows the characteristics of the outcome of 910 cardiopathy patients treated for primary prevention, incomparison to those whose implants were meant for secondary prevention.

El ICD Register de Medtronic fue introducido en América Latina a fin de recoger datos relacionados a la indicación de implantes de CDI para la prevención primaria y secundaria de muerte súbita y a la remisión de pacientes provenientes de Puerto Rico, Caribe, México y Sudamérica. Ademásde esa amplia variedad geográfica, también se incluyeron detalles referentes a los cuidados de saludrecibidos como parte del tratamiento. El presente estudio presenta las características de solución de 910 portadores de cardiopatías tratados para la prevención primaria, en comparación con aquellos cuyo implante se destinó a la prevención secundaria.

Registro latino-americano de cardiodesfibriladores do ICD registry: aspectos demográficos / Latin american cardiodefribrillator registry ICD registry: demographic aspects

Apresenta-se pela primeira vez na literatura mundial uma avaliação do acompanhamento de pacientes que receberam implante de cardiodesfibriladores na américa latina(ICD Registry - Medtronic Latin America). O resgistro é de vital importância para orientar condutas em cardiopatias de diferentes etiologias, tais como doença de chagas, miocardiopatia dilatada idiopática e coronariopatias...

Prevención primaria y secundaria de muerte súibita en el ICD Registry Latin America / Primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death in the icd registry-latin america

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The ICD Registry is an observational study conducted in Latin America to collect data on indications and follow-up care for primary or secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death patients. The objective of this study is to compare and evaluate the characteristics of primary versus secondary prevention in the patient population enrolled in the registry. METHODS: Demographic data, indication, etiology, NYHA functional class and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), pharmacological treatment at implant and the type of ICD implanted were also collected. During the follow-up period the ICD therapies delivered, patient hospitalizations and mortality were evaluated. RESULTS: 507 patients were evaluated. Average age 60 +/- 14 years old, 78% male. Coronary heart disease was the most common etiology (43.6%). NYHA Functional Class I/II at the time of implant (73.6%). Average LVEF was 34 +/- 16%. Out of 507 patients, 189 received an ICD for primary prevention; 318 for secondary prevention. Primary prevention patients were older, predominantly male and had a lower EF. The rate of mortality and hospitalizations were similar between both groups with a higher rate of appropriate therapies in secondary prevention patients. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to demonstrate clinical characteristics of primary prevention patients in Latin America. There were no significant statistically differences in a short follow-up period in mortality or hospitalization as compared to the secondary prevention patient population in the Registry.

Educational clinical case series for pediatric allergy and immunology: allergic proctocolitis, food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome and allergic eosinophilic gastroenteritis with protein-losing gastroenteropathy as manifestations of non-IgE-mediated cow's milk allergy.

Cow's milk protein allergy is the most common food allergy in infants and young children. It is estimated that up to 50% of pediatric cow's milk allergy is non-IgE-mediated. Allergic proctocolitis is a benign disorder manifesting with blood-streaked stools in otherwise healthy-appearing infants who are breast- or formula-fed. Symptoms resolve within 48-72 h following elimination of dietary cow's milk protein. Most infants tolerate cow's milk by their first birthday. Food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome presents in young formula-fed infants with chronic emesis, diarrhea, and failure to thrive. Reintroduction of cow's milk protein following a period of avoidance results in profuse, repetitive emesis within 2-3 h following ingestion; 20% of acute exposures may be associated with hypovolemic shock. Treatment of acute reactions is with vigorous hydration. Most children become tolerant with age; attempts of re-introduction of milk must be done under physician supervision and with secure i.v. access. Allergic eosinophilic gastroenteritis affects infants as well as older children and adolescents. Abdominal pain, emesis, diarrhea, failure to thrive, or weight loss are the most common symptoms. A subset of patients may develop protein-losing enteropathy. Fifty percent of affected children are atopic and have evidence of food-specific IgE antibody but skin prick tests and serum food-IgE levels correlate with response to elimination diet poorly. Elemental diet based on the amino-acid formula leads to resolutions of gastrointestinal eosinophilic inflammation typically within 6 wk.

A multicenter, randomized trial of long-acting octreotide for the optimum prevention of chemotherapy-induced diarrhea: results of the STOP trial.

Diarrhea is a well-recognized side effect of chemotherapy and can result in chemotherapy delay and/or dose reduction, potentially reducing the therapeutic benefit of treatment. Octreotide has been shown to be effective in controlling chemotherapy-induced diarrhea (CID). In this open-label, randomized, multicenter study, designed to asses the effects of two dose levels of octreotide long-acting release (LAR), patients with active or prior CID and scheduled for chemotherapy were randomized to receive up to six doses of either 30 or 40 mg of octreotide LAR. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients experiencing severe diarrhea during the trial. Secondary endpoints included the proportion of patients requiring IV fluids due to diarrhea, unscheduled visits to healthcare professionals due to diarrhea, and changes in primary therapy, as well as treatment satisfaction and quality of life. In total, 147 patients were randomized and received at least 1 dose; 124 patients were efficacy-evaluable. Baseline characters were balanced in the 30-mg and 40-mg groups with the exception of gender. Fewer patients in the 40-mg group compared with those in the 30-mg group experienced severe diarrhea (61.7% vs 48.4%; P = 0.14), required IV fluid (31.7% vs 18.8%; P = 0.10), and had diarrhea-related unscheduled healthcare visits (41.7% vs. 28.1 %; P = 0.11); however, these differences were not statistically significant. No significant differences were observed between the treatment groups in either measured quality of life or treatment satisfaction. Adverse events were balanced between the two groups. No specific recommendations can be made from this trial regarding the use of 30 mg versus 40 mg of octreotide LAR for CID.