Long-term safety and efficacy of tezacaftor-ivacaftor in individuals with cystic fibrosis aged 12 years or older who are homozygous or heterozygous for Phe508del CFTR (EXTEND): an open-label extension study.

BACKGROUND: Tezacaftor-ivacaftor is an approved cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulator shown to be efficacious and generally safe and well tolerated over 8-24 weeks in phase 3 clinical studies in participants aged 12 years or older with cystic fibrosis homozygous for the Phe508del CFTR mutation (F/F; study 661-106 [EVOLVE]) or heterozygous for the Phe508del CFTR mutation and a residual function mutation (F/RF; study 661-108 [EXPAND]). Longer-term (>24 weeks) safety and efficacy of tezacaftor-ivacaftor has not been assessed in clinical studies. Here, we present results of study 661-110 (EXTEND), a 96-week open-label extension study that assessed long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of tezacaftor-ivacaftor in participants aged 12 years or older with cystic fibrosis who were homozygous or heterozygous for the Phe508del CFTR mutation. METHODS: Study 661-110 was a 96-week, phase 3, multicentre, open-label study at 170 clinical research sites in Australia, Europe, Israel, and North America. Participants were aged 12 years or older, had cystic fibrosis, were homozygous or heterozygous for Phe508del CFTR, and completed one of six parent studies of tezacaftor-ivacaftor: studies 661-103, 661-106, 661-107, 661-108, 661-109, and 661-111. Participants received oral tezacaftor 100 mg once daily and oral ivacaftor 150 mg once every 12 h for up to 96 weeks. The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability. Secondary endpoints were changes in lung function, nutritional parameters, and respiratory symptom scores; pulmonary exacerbations; and pharmacokinetic parameters. A post-hoc analysis assessed the rate of lung function decline in F/F participants who received up to 120 weeks of tezacaftor-ivacaftor in studies 661-106 (F/F) and/or 661-110 compared with a matched cohort of CFTR modulator-untreated historical F/F controls from the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation Patient Registry. Primary safety analyses were done in all participants from all six parent studies who received at least one dose of study drug during this study. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02565914). FINDINGS: Between Aug 31, 2015, to May 31, 2019, 1044 participants were enrolled in study 661-110 from the six parent studies of whom 1042 participants received at least one dose of study drug and were included in the safety set. 995 (95%) participants had at least one TEAE; 22 (2%) had TEAEs leading to discontinuation; and 351 (34%) had serious TEAEs. No deaths occurred during the treatment-emergent period; after the treatment-emergent period, two deaths occurred, which were both deemed unrelated to study drug. F/F (106/110; n=459) and F/RF (108/110; n=226) participants beginning tezacaftor-ivacaftor in study 661-110 had improvements in efficacy endpoints consistent with parent studies; improvements in lung function and nutritional parameters and reductions in pulmonary exacerbations observed in the tezacaftor-ivacaftor groups in the parent studies were generally maintained in study 661-110 for an additional 96 weeks. Pharmacokinetic parameters were also similar to those in the parent studies. The annualised rate of lung function decline was 61·5% (95% CI 35·8 to 86·1) lower in tezacaftor-ivacaftor-treated F/F participants versus untreated matched historical controls. INTERPRETATION: Tezacaftor-ivacaftor was generally safe, well tolerated, and efficacious for up to 120 weeks, and the safety profile of tezacaftor-ivacaftor in study 661-110 was consistent with cystic fibrosis manifestations and with the safety profiles of the parent studies. The rate of lung function decline was significantly reduced in F/F participants, consistent with cystic fibrosis disease modification. Our results support the clinical benefit of long-term tezacaftor-ivacaftor treatment for people aged 12 years or older with cystic fibrosis with F/F or F/RF genotypes. FUNDING: Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated.

The cost-effectiveness of pegaspargase versus native asparaginase for first-line treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: a UK-based cost-utility analysis.

BACKGROUND: L-asparaginase is a key component of treatment for patients with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) in the UK. Commonly used forms of asparaginase are native E. coli-derived asparaginase (native asparaginase) and pegaspargase in first-line combination therapy, and native Erwinia chrysanthemi-derived asparaginase (Erwinia asparaginase) as second-line treatment. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pegaspargase versus native asparaginase in first-line combination therapy for patients with newly diagnosed ALL. A combined decision tree and health-state transition Markov cost-effectiveness model was developed to assess the relative costs and health outcomes of pegaspargase versus native asparaginase in the UK setting. RESULTS: In base case analyses, first-line pegaspargase (followed by Erwinia asparaginase in cases of hypersensitivity) dominated first-line native asparaginase followed by Erwinia asparaginase; i.e. resulted in lower costs and more quality-adjusted life year gain. The favourable hypersensitivity rates and administration profile of pegaspargase led to lifetime cost savings of £4741 versus native asparaginase. Pegaspargase remained cost-effective versus all treatment strategies in all scenario analyses, including use of the 2500 IU/m2 dose, recommended for patients ≤21 years of age. CONCLUSIONS: Pegaspargase, as part of multi-drug chemotherapy, is a cost-effective option for the treatment of newly diagnosed ALL. Based on this study, The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Technology Appraisal Committee concluded that it could recommend pegaspargase as a cost-effective use of National Health Service resources in England & Wales for treating ALL in children, young people and adults with untreated, newly diagnosed disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UKALL 2011, EudraCT number 2010-020924-22; UKALL 2003, EudraCT number 2007-004013-34; UKALL14, EudraCT number 2009-012717-22.

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in HPV Vaccine Uptake Among a Sample of College Women.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to determine the association between racial/ethnic status and uptake and completion of the HPV vaccine series in college women. METHODS: Participants were recruited from a large university in North Central Florida. Young women between 18 and 26 years of age who were currently enrolled in a college course comprised the study sample. Participants completed an anonymous online survey that assessed sociodemographic characteristics, sexual behaviors, gynecological healthcare utilization, and perception of risk to HPV-associated diseases. Multivariable analysis was conducted to determine the relationship between racial/ethnic status and HPV vaccination status. RESULTS: Of the 835 with complete data (51.0 % white, 16.5 % black, 13.8 % Hispanic, 8.3 % Asian, and 9.9 % other), 53 % had initiated (receipt of at least one dose) the three-dose HPV vaccine series. Of those who initiated, 70 % indicated that they had completed all three doses. In adjusted analysis, blacks were significantly less likely to report initiation [adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR) = 0.78; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 0.63, 0.97] and completion (aPR = 0.64; 95 % CI: 0.48, 0.84) of the three dose HPV vaccine as compared to whites. Although completion rates were lower in all other racial/ethnic groups as compared to whites, these rates did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: These findings are consistent with research from other types of settings and demonstrate lower initiation and completion rates of HPV vaccine among black women attending college as compared to their white counterparts. Additional research is needed to understand why black college women have low initiation and completion rates.

College students and use of K2: an emerging drug of abuse in young persons.

BACKGROUND: K2 or "spice" has emerged as a popular legal alternative to marijuana among adolescents and young adults. However, no data has been published assessing prevalence of and associations with ever K2 use in any population. This study's aims were to examine prevalence of ever K2 use among a sample of college students, to determine characteristics of persons who use K2, and to access the association between K2 and other drug use. FINDINGS: Ever use of K2 was reported by 69 (8%) of the sample of 852 college students. Response rate was 36%. Bivariate and multivariate analyses assessed whether sociodemographic characteristics and other drug use were associated with ever use of K2. Ever use of K2 was reported by 69 (8%) of the sample. Among these 69 individuals, 61 (88%) had used a cigarette and 25 (36%) had used a hookah to smoke K2. In multivariate analyses, K2 use was more common in males (vs. females, adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR)=2.0, 95% Confidence Interval (CI)=1.2-3.5, p=0.01) and 1st or 2nd year college students (vs. 3rd year or above, aOR=2.4, 95% CI=1.2-5.0, p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Ever use of K2 in this sample was higher than ever use of many other drugs of abuse that are commonly monitored in adolescents and young adults. Although DEA had banned five synthetic cannabinoids recently, clinicians and public health officials concerned with substance abuse in youth should be aware of and monitor the use of this drug in college students over time.