Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
1.
Anticancer Res ; 44(6): 2653-2660, 2024 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38821611

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND/AIM: There have been advances in the development of immune checkpoint inhibitors for monotherapy and combination therapy with other anticancer agents in recent years. The combination of bevacizumab, carboplatin, and paclitaxel with atezolizumab, an anti-programmed death ligand 1 antibody (ABCP therapy), has been reported to be effective for treating non-small cell lung cancer. However, reports on its adverse events are limited. In this study, a survey and disproportionality analysis based on the Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report (JADER) database was conducted to elucidate the adverse event profile of ABCP therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The reporting odds ratio (ROR) and information component were used as indicators for the disproportionality analysis. The ROR was also used to assess the changes in the reporting intensity with combination therapy, and the mutual exclusivity of the 95% confidence interval between the compared groups was considered. RESULTS: The reported adverse events of ABCP therapy mirrored those of the individual drugs that constituted it. ABCP therapy enhanced the reporting intensity of adverse events related to leukocytes and the skin, while decreased those related to interstitial lung disease and hepatic function abnormality as immune-related adverse events caused by atezolizumab, and gastrointestinal perforation caused by bevacizumab. CONCLUSION: Our analysis of data from the JADER database has revealed the adverse event profile of ABCP therapy. Our findings emphasize the importance of effectively managing febrile neutropenia and skin-related adverse events in ABCP therapy.


Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Bevacizumab , Carboplatino , Paclitaxel , Humanos , Carboplatino/efectos adversos , Carboplatino/administración & dosificación , Bevacizumab/efectos adversos , Bevacizumab/administración & dosificación , Bevacizumab/uso terapéutico , Paclitaxel/efectos adversos , Paclitaxel/administración & dosificación , Paclitaxel/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/efectos adversos , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/administración & dosificación , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias Pulmonares/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/patología , Femenino , Masculino
2.
J Atheroscler Thromb ; 30(3): 222-236, 2023 Mar 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35599000

RESUMEN

AIM: To examine the efficacy and safety of prasugrel vs clopidogrel in thrombotic stroke patients at risk of ischemic stroke. METHODS: This multicenter, active-controlled, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group study enrolled thrombotic stroke patients aged ≥ 50 years at risk of ischemic stroke. Patients received prasugrel (3.75 mg/day) or clopidogrel (75 or 50 mg/day) for 24-48 weeks; other antiplatelet drugs were prohibited. The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite incidence of ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and death from other vascular causes from the start to 1 day after treatment completion or discontinuation. Secondary efficacy endpoints included the incidences of ischemic stroke, MI, death from other vascular causes, ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack, and stroke. Safety endpoints included bleeding events and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: In the prasugrel (N=118) and clopidogrel (N=112; all received 75 mg) groups, the primary efficacy endpoint composite incidence (95% confidence interval) was 6.8% (3.0%-12.9%) and 7.1% (3.1%-13.6%), respectively. The risk ratio (prasugrel/clopidogrel) was 0.949 (0.369-2.443). Secondary efficacy endpoints followed a similar trend. The combined incidences of life-threatening, major, and clinically relevant bleeding were 5.0% and 3.5% in the prasugrel and clopidogrel groups, respectively. The incidences of all bleeding events and AEs were 19.2% and 24.6% and 76.7% and 82.5% in the prasugrel and clopidogrel groups, respectively. No serious AEs were causally related to prasugrel. CONCLUSIONS: We observed a risk reduction of 5% with prasugrel vs clopidogrel, indicating comparable efficacy. There were no major safety issues for prasugrel.


Asunto(s)
Síndrome Coronario Agudo , Accidente Cerebrovascular Isquémico , Infarto del Miocardio , Accidente Cerebrovascular , Accidente Cerebrovascular Trombótico , Humanos , Clorhidrato de Prasugrel/efectos adversos , Clopidogrel/efectos adversos , Accidente Cerebrovascular Isquémico/tratamiento farmacológico , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/efectos adversos , Accidente Cerebrovascular/epidemiología , Infarto del Miocardio/epidemiología , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Factores de Riesgo , Accidente Cerebrovascular Trombótico/inducido químicamente , Accidente Cerebrovascular Trombótico/tratamiento farmacológico , Resultado del Tratamiento , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/tratamiento farmacológico
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA