Intravitreal Aflibercept vs Laser Therapy for Retinopathy of Prematurity: Two-Year Efficacy and Safety Outcomes in the Nonrandomized Controlled Trial FIREFLEYE next.

Importance: Prospective long-term data after retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) treatment with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections vs laser therapy are scarce. The FIREFLEYE (Aflibercept for ROP IVT Injection vs Laser Therapy) next trial is prospectively evaluating the long-term efficacy and safety outcomes following ROP treatment with intravitreal aflibercept vs laser therapy. Objective: To evaluate 2-year ophthalmic and safety outcomes after 0.4-mg aflibercept injection or laser therapy in the 24-week randomized (2:1) FIREFLEYE trial (FIREFLEYE outcomes previously reported). Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective nonrandomized controlled trial performed in 24 countries in Asia, Europe, and South America (2020-2025) follows up participants treated in the FIREFLEYE randomized clinical trial (2019-2021) through 5 years of age. Participants included children born very or extremely preterm (gestational age ≤32 weeks) or with very or extremely low birth weight (≤1500 g) who were previously treated with a 0.4-mg injection of aflibercept compared with laser therapy for severe acute-phase ROP. Data for the present interim analysis were acquired from March 18, 2020, to July 25, 2022. Interventions: Complications of ROP treated at investigator discretion (no study treatment). Main Outcomes and Measures: Efficacy end points included ROP status, unfavorable structural outcomes, ROP recurrence, treatment for ROP complications, completion of vascularization, and visual function. Safety end points included adverse events and growth and neurodevelopmental outcomes. Results: Overall, 100 children were enrolled (median gestational age, 26 [range, 23-31] weeks; 53 boys and 47 girls). Of these, 21 were Asian, 2 were Black, 75 were White, and 2 were of more than 1 race. At 2 years of age, 61 of 63 children (96.8%) in the aflibercept group vs 30 of 32 (93.8%) in the laser group had no ROP. Through 2 years of age, 62 of 66 (93.9%) in the aflibercept group and 32 of 34 (94.1%) in the laser group had no unfavorable structural outcomes. No new retinal detachment occurred during the study. Four children in the aflibercept group (6.1%) were treated for ROP complications before 1 year of age (2 had preexisting end-stage disease and total retinal detachment; 1 had reactivated plus disease; and 1 had recurrent retinal neovascularization not further specified). Most children were able to fix and follow a 5-cm toy (aflibercept group, 118 of 122 eyes [96.7%] among 63 children; laser group, 62 of 63 eyes [98.4%] among 33 children). High myopia was present in 9 of 115 eyes (7.8%) among 5 children in the aflibercept group and 13 of 60 eyes (21.7%) among 9 children in the laser group. No relevant differences in growth and neurodevelopmental outcomes by Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition and Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, Second Edition were identified. Conclusions and Relevance: In this nonrandomized follow-up of a randomized clinical trial comparing treatment of severe acute-phase ROP with 0.4-mg injection of aflibercept and laser, disease control was stable and visual function was appropriate in children through 2 years of age. No adverse effects on safety, including growth and neurodevelopment, were identified. These findings provide clinically relevant long-term information on intravitreal aflibercept injection therapy for ROP. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04015180.

Investigating the use of finerenone in children with chronic kidney disease and proteinuria: design of the FIONA and open-label extension studies.

INTRODUCTION: Proteinuria is a modifiable risk factor for chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression in children. Finerenone, a selective, non-steroidal, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) has been approved to treat adults with CKD associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) following results from the phase III clinical trials FIDELIO-DKD (NCT02540993) and FIGARO-DKD (NCT02545049). In a pre-specified pooled analysis of both studies (N = 13,026), finerenone was shown to have an acceptable safety profile and was efficacious in decreasing the risk of adverse kidney and cardiovascular outcomes and of proteinuria. OBJECTIVE: FIONA and the associated open-label extension (OLE) study aim to demonstrate that combining finerenone with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) is safe, well-tolerated, and effective in sustainably reducing urinary protein excretion in children with CKD and proteinuria. DESIGN: FIONA (NCT05196035; Eudra-CT: 2021-002071-19) is a randomized (2:1), double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, phase III study of 6 months' duration in approximately 219 pediatric patients. Patients must have a clinical diagnosis of CKD (an eGFR ≥ 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 if ≥ 1 to < 18 years or a serum creatinine level ≤ 0.40 mg/dL for infants 6 months to < 1 year) with significant proteinuria despite ACEi or ARB usage. The primary objective is to demonstrate that finerenone, added to an ACEi or ARB, is superior to placebo in reducing urinary protein excretion. FIONA OLE (NCT05457283; Eudra-CT: 2021-002905-89) is a single-arm, open-label study, enrolling participants who have completed FIONA. The primary objective of FIONA OLE is to provide long-term safety data. FIONA has two primary endpoints: urinary protein-to-creatinine ratio (UPCR) reduction of ≥ 30% from baseline to day 180 and percent change in UPCR from baseline to day 180. A sample size of 198 participants (aged 2 to < 18 years) in FIONA will provide at least 80% power to reject the null hypothesis of either of the two primary endpoints. CONCLUSION: FIONA is evaluating the use of finerenone in children with CKD and proteinuria. Should safety, tolerability, and efficacy be demonstrated, finerenone could become a useful additional therapeutic agent in managing proteinuria and improving kidney outcomes in children with CKD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05196035. Registered on 19 January 2022.

Effect of Intravitreal Aflibercept vs Laser Photocoagulation on Treatment Success of Retinopathy of Prematurity: The FIREFLEYE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Laser photocoagulation, which is the standard treatment for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP), can have adverse events. Studies of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections have suggested efficacy in the treatment of ROP, but few studies have directly compared them with laser treatments. Objective: To compare intravitreal aflibercept vs laser photocoagulation in infants with ROP requiring treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: This noninferiority, phase 3, 24-week, randomized clinical trial was conducted in 27 countries (64 hospital sites) throughout Asia, Europe, and South America. Overall, 118 infants (gestational age ≤32 weeks at birth or birth weight ≤1500 g) with ROP severity (zone I stage 1+ [stage 1 plus increased disease activity], zone I stage 2+, zone I stage 3, zone I stage 3+, zone II stage 2+, or zone II stage 3+) requiring treatment or with aggressive posterior ROP in at least 1 eye were enrolled between September 25, 2019, and August 28, 2020 (the last visit occurred on February 12, 2021). Interventions: Infants were randomized 2:1 to receive a 0.4-mg dose of intravitreal aflibercept (n = 75) or laser photocoagulation (n = 43) at baseline. Additional treatment was allowed as prespecified. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of infants without active ROP and unfavorable structural outcomes 24 weeks after starting treatment (assessed by investigators). The requirement for rescue treatment was considered treatment failure. Intravitreal aflibercept was deemed noninferior if the lower limit of the 1-sided 95% bayesian credible interval for the treatment difference was greater than -5%. Results: Among 118 infants randomized, 113 were treated (mean gestational age, 26.3 [SD, 1.9] weeks; 53 [46.9%] were female; 16.8% had aggressive posterior ROP, 19.5% had zone I ROP, and 63.7% had zone II ROP) and 104 completed the study. Treatment (intravitreal aflibercept: n = 75; laser photocoagulation: n = 38) was mostly bilateral (92.9%), and 82.2% of eyes in the intravitreal aflibercept group received 1 injection per eye. Treatment success was 85.5% with intravitreal aflibercept vs 82.1% with laser photocoagulation (between-group difference, 3.4% [1-sided 95% credible interval, -8.0% to ∞]). Rescue treatment was required in 4.8% (95% CI, 1.9% to 9.6%) of eyes in the intravitreal aflibercept group vs 11.1% (95% CI, 4.9% to 20.7%) of eyes in the laser photocoagulation group. The serious adverse event rates were 13.3% (ocular) and 24.0% (systemic) in the intravitreal aflibercept group compared with 7.9% and 36.8%, respectively, in the laser photocoagulation group. Three deaths, which occurred 4 to 9 weeks after intravitreal aflibercept treatment, were considered unrelated to aflibercept by the investigators. Conclusions and Relevance: Among infants with ROP, intravitreal aflibercept compared with laser photocoagulation did not meet criteria for noninferiority with respect to the primary outcome of the proportion of infants achieving treatment success at week 24. Further data would be required for more definitive conclusions regarding the comparative effects of intravitreal aflibercept and laser photocoagulation in this population. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04004208.

Off-label prescriptions in child and adolescent psychiatry. Why, when and how? / Prescripciones off-label en psiquiatría infanto-juvenil. ¿Por qué, cuándo y cómo?

In the paediatric population, paticulary in the field of child and adolescent psychiatry, off-label indications are the rule rather than the exception. This may occur when a drug is indicated for a pathology, age, route of administration or treatment length other than those described in the product label. Argentina, unlike other countries, has no explicit regulation on off-label prescribing. Therefore, the prescription of a medicine in a manner different from that approved by the National Administration of Medicines, Food and Medical Technology (ANMAT) does not have a regulatory framework regarding the conditions that must be met at the time of treatment. Although off-label use is not prohibited, it carries an additional risk. In order to encourage research in paediatrics, regulatory agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) have introduced legislative reform. The following paper will review the current framework of the regulatory agencies that are relevant to the paediatric population and will analyse criteria to guide physicians in the rational use of off-label pharmacotherapy.

En la población pediátrica y particularmente en el ámbito de la psiquiatría infanto-juvenil, las indicaciones off-label representan una regla más que una excepción. Esta práctica puede ocurrir cuando un fármaco se indica en una patología, rango terapéutico, edad, vía de administración o duración distinta a las que se describen en el prospecto. Argentina, a diferencia de otros países, no tiene una regulación expresa en relación a la prescripción off-label. Por lo tanto, la indicación de un medicamento de manera diferente a la aprobada por la Administración Nacional de Medicamentos, Alimentos y Tecnología Médica (ANMAT) no posee un marco normativo en lo referente a las condiciones que deben ser cumplidas al momento de ese acto médico. Si bien el uso off-label no se encuentra prohibido, conlleva un riesgo adicional. Con el objetivo de fomentar la investigación en pediatría, las agencias reguladoras como la Food and Drug Administration (FDA) y la European Medicines Agency (EMA) han introducido reformas legislativas. En el siguiente trabajo se revisarán las normativas vigentes de las agencias reguladores que competen a la población pediátrica y se analizarán criterios que orienten al médico al uso racional de la farmacoterapia off-label.

Thirty-Day Outcomes of Children and Adolescents With COVID-19: An International Experience.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize the demographics, comorbidities, symptoms, in-hospital treatments, and health outcomes among children and adolescents diagnosed or hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to compare them in secondary analyses with patients diagnosed with previous seasonal influenza in 2017-2018. METHODS: International network cohort using real-world data from European primary care records (France, Germany, and Spain), South Korean claims and US claims, and hospital databases. We included children and adolescents diagnosed and/or hospitalized with COVID-19 at age <18 between January and June 2020. We described baseline demographics, comorbidities, symptoms, 30-day in-hospital treatments, and outcomes including hospitalization, pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, and death. RESULTS: A total of 242 158 children and adolescents diagnosed and 9769 hospitalized with COVID-19 and 2 084 180 diagnosed with influenza were studied. Comorbidities including neurodevelopmental disorders, heart disease, and cancer were more common among those hospitalized with versus diagnosed with COVID-19. Dyspnea, bronchiolitis, anosmia, and gastrointestinal symptoms were more common in COVID-19 than influenza. In-hospital prevalent treatments for COVID-19 included repurposed medications (<10%) and adjunctive therapies: systemic corticosteroids (6.8%-7.6%), famotidine (9.0%-28.1%), and antithrombotics such as aspirin (2.0%-21.4%), heparin (2.2%-18.1%), and enoxaparin (2.8%-14.8%). Hospitalization was observed in 0.3% to 1.3% of the cohort diagnosed with COVID-19, with undetectable (n < 5 per database) 30-day fatality. Thirty-day outcomes including pneumonia and hypoxemia were more frequent in COVID-19 than influenza. CONCLUSIONS: Despite negligible fatality, complications including hospitalization, hypoxemia, and pneumonia were more frequent in children and adolescents with COVID-19 than with influenza. Dyspnea, anosmia, and gastrointestinal symptoms could help differentiate diagnoses. A wide range of medications was used for the inpatient management of pediatric COVID-19.

Baseline characteristics, management, and outcomes of 55,270 children and adolescents diagnosed with COVID-19 and 1,952,693 with influenza in France, Germany, Spain, South Korea and the United States: an international network cohort study.

Objectives To characterize the demographics, comorbidities, symptoms, in-hospital treatments, and health outcomes among children/adolescents diagnosed or hospitalized with COVID-19. Secondly, to describe health outcomes amongst children/adolescents diagnosed with previous seasonal influenza. Design International network cohort. Setting Real-world data from European primary care records (France/Germany/Spain), South Korean claims and US claims and hospital databases. Participants Diagnosed and/or hospitalized children/adolescents with COVID-19 at age <18 between January and June 2020; diagnosed with influenza in 2017-2018. Main outcome measures Baseline demographics and comorbidities, symptoms, 30-day in-hospital treatments and outcomes including hospitalization, pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), multi-system inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C), and death. Results A total of 55,270 children/adolescents diagnosed and 3,693 hospitalized with COVID-19 and 1,952,693 diagnosed with influenza were studied. Comorbidities including neurodevelopmental disorders, heart disease, and cancer were all more common among those hospitalized vs diagnosed with COVID-19. The most common COVID-19 symptom was fever. Dyspnea, bronchiolitis, anosmia and gastrointestinal symptoms were more common in COVID-19 than influenza. In-hospital treatments for COVID-19 included repurposed medications (<10%), and adjunctive therapies: systemic corticosteroids (6.8% to 37.6%), famotidine (9.0% to 28.1%), and antithrombotics such as aspirin (2.0% to 21.4%), heparin (2.2% to 18.1%), and enoxaparin (2.8% to 14.8%). Hospitalization was observed in 0.3% to 1.3% of the COVID-19 diagnosed cohort, with undetectable (N<5 per database) 30-day fatality. Thirty-day outcomes including pneumonia, ARDS, and MIS-C were more frequent in COVID-19 than influenza. Conclusions Despite negligible fatality, complications including pneumonia, ARDS and MIS-C were more frequent in children/adolescents with COVID-19 than with influenza. Dyspnea, anosmia and gastrointestinal symptoms could help differential diagnosis. A wide range of medications were used for the inpatient management of pediatric COVID-19.

[Hepatotoxicity in healthy infants exposed to nevirapine during pregnancy]. / Hepatotoxicidad en el lactante sano expuesto a nevirapina durante el embarazo.

BACKGROUND: The use of nevirapine in HIV-infected pregnant women is discouraged due to its potential to cause hepatotoxicity. There is limited information available on the toxicity in non-HIV infected newborn exposed to this drug during pregnancy. The aim of the study is to determine the extent of hepatotoxicity in the newborn exposed to nevirapine and HIV during pregnancy. METHODS: A cross-sectional, observational, multicenter study was conducted on a cohort of healthy infants born to HIV-infected mothers, in whom the first determination of alanine aminotransferase (ALT), before 6weeks of age, was collected. Patients were allocated to 2groups according to exposure to nevirapine during pregnancy. Hepatotoxicity was rated according to the AIDS Table for Grading the Severity of Adult and Pediatric Adverse Events (DAIDS). RESULTS: This study included 160newborns from 159pregnancies (88exposed to nevirapine-based regimens and 71 exposed to protease inhibitors-based therapies). No cases of hepatotoxicity were observed according to the DAIDS Table for Grading. Two cases of ALT above normal values (2.8%; 95%CI: 0.3-9.8%) were observed in patients not exposed to nevirapine, and one case (1.1%; 95%CI: 0.0-6.1%) in the group exposed to nevirapine (P=.585). CONCLUSION: The lack of differences between groups suggests that highly active antiretroviral treatment regimens including nevirapine administered during pregnancy do not involve a higher risk of liver disease compared to other treatment combinations.