Treatment persistence of interleukin-17 inhibitor class drugs among patients with psoriasis in Japan: a retrospective database study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Real-world evidence on persistence of interleukin-17 inhibitors (IL-17i) as a drug class among Japanese patients with psoriasis is lacking. Hence, we aimed to describe persistence rates of IL-17is among patients with psoriasis including psoriasis vulgaris (PsO), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and generalized pustular psoriasis (GPP) or erythrodermic psoriasis (EP) in Japan. METHODS: We analyzed claims data from the Medical Data Vision database. Patients ≥15 years old with a psoriasis diagnosis and an IL-17i prescription between November 2016 and August 2020 were included and followed through August 2021. Persistence rates of the IL-17i class among patients with psoriasis and its subtypes (PsO, PsA, and GPP or EP), and persistence rates of ixekizumab, secukinumab, or brodalumab among patients with PsO or PsA were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method. Analyses were conducted in the bio-naïve and bio-experienced subgroups. RESULTS: The IL-17i class had >50% persistence rates up to 36 months among patients with psoriasis and its subtypes (PsO, PsA, and GPP or EP). 36-Month persistence rates for ixekizumab, secukinumab, and brodalumab were 46.2% to 57.7% in patients with PsO and 43.0% to 48.4% in patients with PsA. Across analyses, bio-naïve patients demonstrated similar or greater persistence rates than bio-experienced patients. CONCLUSION: IL-17is' persistence rates over 36 months were >50% among patients with psoriasis and its subtypes (PsO, PsA, and GPP or EP) in Japan.

Comparative study of dulaglutide single-use pen Ateos versus insulin degludec FlexTouch on learning and mock administration time in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus - a post-hoc analysis.

Aims: Clinical data have shown that patients with diabetes require shorter training time to use Ateos versus FlexTouch. Using data acquired from a previous study, self-administration procedures that necessitated more time and repetition during mock injection were evaluated.Methods: In this open-label task- and interview-based crossover study, 48 self-injection naïve participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) were randomized to 1 of 2 sequences to perform a mock injection of Ateos and FlexTouch into a rubber pad after receiving training. Time needed to conduct mock injection steps (preparation, pre-injection set-up, injection, clean-up), and the number and time needed for repeated steps due to procedural errors, were measured as post-hoc analyses.Results: Mean time for preparation, injection, and clean-up was shorter for Ateos (13, 15, 9 s) versus FlexTouch (96, 53, 36 s). Overall time for administration including repeated steps was 75 s for Ateos and 288 s for FlexTouch. Nine participants repeated procedures due to errors when using Ateos (preparation: 6; pre-injection set-up: 2; injection: 1), and 7 participants when using FlexTouch (preparation: 2; pre-injection set-up: 2; injection: 5). There was 1 repeat per person for Ateos injections versus multiple repeats for FlexTouch injections.Conclusions:Post-hoc analysis demonstrates the time needed for overall administration was shorter for Ateos than FlexTouch, and time for each procedure was shorter or similar for Ateos versus FlexTouch. Ateos was easy for participants with T2DM to learn with fewer repeated steps due to procedural errors, and easy for healthcare professionals to introduce to their patients.

Comparative usability study of the dulaglutide single-use pen versus the insulin degludec FlexTouch® among self-injection-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Japan.

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed training time with the dulaglutide single-use pen (SUP) and the insulin degludec disposable prefilled pen (FlexTouch®) in self-injection-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Japan. METHODS: This multi-center, open-label, comparative, crossover study measured training time with the dulaglutide SUP vs FlexTouch®. Participants learned how to use both devices in a randomly assigned order. Healthcare providers (HCP) conducted the training. The primary end-point was the time required to train self-injection-naïve T2DM participants to self-inject correctly using each device. Secondary end-points included performance measures, such as success and error rates, patient perceptions related to ease-of-use, and factors associated with training time and performance. RESULTS: Overall, 48 participants were randomized and completed the study. The mean training time to achieve correct administration was significantly shorter with the dulaglutide SUP vs FlexTouch® (7.4 min vs 19.7 min, p < .001). The proportions of participants who successfully completed the mock injection without error were similar for both devices. Ninety-two percent (44/48) of participants reported that the dulaglutide SUP was easier to use than FlexTouch®. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, participants required a shorter training time to achieve correct administration with the dulaglutide SUP, and had a higher preference for the dulaglutide SUP, when compared to FlexTouch®. These data suggest that the dulaglutide SUP is easy-to-use, which may decrease the burden on HCPs to train diabetic patients how to administer injection therapy and reduce patient injection hurdles, such as needle fear.

Taxane-induced peripheral neuropathy and health-related quality of life in postoperative breast cancer patients undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy: N-SAS BC 02, a randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: To elucidate whether adjuvant taxane monotherapy is a feasible and tolerable for postoperative breast cancer patients, we evaluated the severity of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) and the relative tolerability of regimens by health-related quality of life (HRQOL) assessment in node-positive breast cancer patients treated with taxane-containing regimens. METHODS: We evaluated CIPN and HRQOL in the first 300 patients enrolled in a larger (1,060 total) multicenter phase III trial randomized to one of four adjuvant regimens: (1) anthracycline-cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel (ACP), (2) AC followed by docetaxel (ACD), (3) paclitaxel alone (PTX), or (4) docetaxel alone (DTX). CIPN was assessed by the Patient Neurotoxicity Questionnaire (PNQ) and the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria, and HRQOL by Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G). CIPN and HRQOL scores were compared between ACP and ACD vs. PTX and DTX, and ACP and PTX vs. ACD and DTX. RESULTS: PNQ sensory scores were significantly higher in patients treated with taxane monotherapy compared to treatment with AC followed by taxane (P = .003). No significant differences in PNQ sensory scores were observed between the ACP and PTX vs. ACD and DTX regimens (P = .669). Regardless of taxane regimen, PNQ severity scores for CIPN appear to be largely reversible within 1 year of adjuvant treatment. No significant difference in FACT-G scores was observed between any regimens during the study treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-reported CIPN was significantly more severe with single-agent adjuvant taxane compared to AC followed by taxane treatment; however, the HRQOL findings support that single-agent taxane treatment is tolerable.

Feasibility and validity of the Patient Neurotoxicity Questionnaire during taxane chemotherapy in a phase III randomized trial in patients with breast cancer: N-SAS BC 02.

GOALS: The aim of the study was to determine the feasibility and validity of a newly developed patient-based instrument--the Patient Neurotoxicity Questionnaire (PNQ)--for grading chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We prospectively collected data from 300 female patients who were treated with taxane chemotherapy for primary breast cancer as part of a national multicenter phase III randomized trial (N-SAS BC 02). We evaluated patient compliance with the PNQ and several validation parameters, including concordance between CIPN grades noted by physicians (National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria) and patients (PNQ), and the concurrent validity and responsiveness of the PNQ versus the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group-Neurotoxicity (FACT/GOG-Ntx) utilizing data at pre-treatment and before three, five, and seven treatment cycles. MAIN RESULTS: The questionnaire completion rate was >90% at all assessments. Evaluation by physicians always resulted in lower neuropathy assessment scores compared with those reported directly by patients (weighted kappa coefficients, 0.02-0.06). Both PNQ sensory and motor scores were significantly correlated with the FACT/GOG-Ntx (r = 0.66 and 0.51, respectively). In the repeated measures analysis of variance model, PNQ grades increased considerably as treatment continued, indicating progressively worsening CIPN over time. CONCLUSIONS: The PNQ has an applicable degree of feasibility and validity, useful for the diagnosis of CIPN as well as for clinical treatment decision-making, where the development of CIPN is a potential treatment-limiting consideration. Physicians underreport and underestimate the severity of CIPN symptoms compared with patients, thereby supporting the importance of assessing patient-reported outcomes using the PNQ.

Prospective assessment of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy due to weekly paclitaxel in patients with advanced or metastatic breast cancer (CSP-HOR 02 study).

GOALS OF WORK: The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) using a patient-based instrument, the Patient Neurotoxicity Questionnaire (PNQ) and a physician-based instrument, the National Cancer Institute-Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC) in patients with advanced or metastatic breast cancer who were treated with weekly paclitaxel. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CIPN symptoms were prospectively assessed in 35 patients using the PNQ, NCI-CTC, and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT)-Taxane including neurotoxicity component (Ntx) at the baseline, and 8 and 16 weeks after starting chemotherapy. RESULTS: For sensory neuropathy symptoms, the reported incidence of CIPN was significantly increased during active treatment in terms of both the PNQ and NCI-CTC assessments. In contrast, there was a notable increase of patient motor neuropathy symptoms that were elucidated only by the PNQ. The PNQ grades of CIPN were widely distributed in the patient population as compared with the NCI-CTC grades for both sensory and motor neuropathy. The sensory PNQ grade was correlated with sensory NCI-CTC grade (r = 0.58) and Ntx (r = 0.51), and the motor PNQ grade was correlated with Ntx (r = 0.57). CONCLUSIONS: The PNQ appears to be more sensitive and responsive than the NCI-CTC for CIPN; the PNQ appears to have diagnostic validity for evaluating CIPN in patients who are receiving neurotoxic chemotherapy.

A questionnaire survey of physicians' perspectives regarding the assessment of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy in patients with breast cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Since there is now growing interest in the incorporation of patient-reported outcome measures in cancer clinical trials, a patient-based questionnaire, the Patient Neurotoxicity Questionnaire (PNQ) was developed to quantify the symptoms and severity of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). The aim of this study was to evaluate the physicians' perspectives regarding the utility and diagnostic value of PNQ. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to 61 physicians who participated in a Phase III randomized trial of adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer (AC followed by taxane versus taxane alone) that used the PNQ to assess CIPN. RESULTS: Forty-seven out of 61 physicians (77%) responded. The majority considered neurosensory symptoms the diagnostic hallmark for CIPN and most regarded interference with activities of daily living (ADLs) as definite justification for treatment modifications. For neurosensory disturbance, the majority of physicians indicated that Grade D severity (moderate to severe symptoms interfering with ADLs) should result in treatment postponement and Grade E severity (severe symptoms preventing most ADLs) should result in treatment discontinuation. Similarly, for neuromotor disturbance, over half of the physicians replied that Grade C (moderate symptoms not interfering with ADLs), D and E severity should result in dose reduction, treatment postponement and treatment discontinuation, respectively. Eighty-four percentage of the physicians reported that the use of the PNQ was helpful in the diagnosis and assessment of patients at risk of CIPN. CONCLUSIONS: The PNQ appears to be a useful instrument for the diagnosis and grading of CIPN, as well as for clinical decision-making regarding treatment modifications secondary to CIPN.