Valuation of EQ-5D-5L in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: A National Representative Study.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate a Saudi-specific value set for the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire using the EuroQol Valuation Technology program and the EuroQol Group's standard protocol. METHODS: Participants were quota-sampled from the Saudi adult population based on residency location, age group, gender, education level, and employment status. The participants were guided through the completion of composite time trade-off (cTTO) and discrete choice experiment (DCE) tasks by trained interviewers using EuroQol Valuation Technology software. Quality control (QC) measures were used to ensure good data quality. Random intercept and Tobit models analyzed the cTTO data, as well as models correcting for heteroskedasticity. DCE data were analyzed using conditional logit models, whereas hybrid models were used to analyze the cTTO and DCE data jointly. To evaluate model performance, prediction accuracy, logical consistency, significance level, and goodness of fit were used. RESULTS: The valuation study included a representative sample of the Saudi population (N = 1000). The hybrid heteroskedastic model without a constant was chosen as the preferred model for generating the value set. The predicted values ranged from -0.683 for the worst health state ("55555") to 1 for the full health state ("11111"). Pain and discomfort had the largest impact on health-state preference values, whereas usual activities had the least. CONCLUSION: The value set for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is the first value set for the EQ-5D-5L for any country in the Middle East. The value set can be used in Saudi health system economic evaluations and decision making.

Economic Evaluation of Three BRAF + MEK Inhibitors for the Treatment of Advanced Unresectable Melanoma With BRAF Mutation From a US Payer Perspective.

BACKGROUND: The combinations of BRAF + MEK inhibitors-encorafenib (ENC) + binimetinib (BIN), cobimetinib (COB) + vemurafenib (VEM), and dabrafenib (DAB) + trametinib (TRA)-are recommended for the treatment of BRAF-mutated advanced melanoma. OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of ENC + BIN versus COB + VEM versus DAB + TRA from a US payer perspective. METHODS: A Markov model was constructed to simulate a hypothetical cohort over a time horizon of 10 years. The overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) curves were independently digitized from a randomized controlled trial for ENC + BIN and fitted using R software. Published and indirectly estimated hazard ratios were used to fit OS and PFS curves for COB + VEM and DAB + TRA. Costs, life-year gains, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) associated with the 3 treatment combinations were estimated. A base case analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were conducted to estimate the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR). A discount rate of 3.5% was applied on cost and outcomes. RESULTS: The ENC + BIN versus COB + VEM comparison was associated with an ICUR of $656 233 per QALY gained. The ENC + BIN versus DAB + TRA comparison was associated with an ICUR of $3 135 269 per QALY gained. The DAB + TRA combination dominated COB + VEM. The base case analysis estimates were confirmed by the PSA estimates. ENC + BIN was the most cost-effective combination at a high willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $573 000 per QALY and $1.5 million/QALY when compared to COB + VEM and DAB + TRA, respectively. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Given current prices and acceptable WTP thresholds, our study suggests that DAB + TRA is the optimum treatment. In this study, ENC + BIN was cost-effective only at a very high WTP per QALY threshold.

Cost-effectiveness of Favipiravir in moderately to severely ill COVID-19 patients in the real-world setting of Saudi arabian pandemic referral hospitals.

Purpose: We aimed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of Favipiravir treatment versus standard of care (SC) in moderately to severely ill COVID-19 patients from the Saudi healthcare payer perspective. Methods: We used the patient-level simulation method to simulate a cohort of 415 patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 disease who were admitted to two Saudi COVID-19 referral hospitals: 220 patients on Favipiravir and 195 patients on SC. We estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of Favipiravir versus SC in terms of the probability to be discharged alive from hospital and the mean time in days to discharge one patient alive. The model was performed twice: first, using unweighted, and second, using weighted clinical and economic data. Weighting using the inverse weight probability method was performed to achieve balance in baseline characteristics. Results: In the unweighted model, base case (probabilistic) ICER estimates favored Favipiravir at savings of Saudi Riyal (SAR)1,611,511 (SAR1,998,948) per 1% increase in the probability of being discharged alive. As to mean time to discharging one patient alive, ICERs favored Favipiravir at savings of SAR11,498 (SAR11,125). Similar results were observed in the weighted model with savings using Favipiravir of SAR1,514,893 (SAR2,453,551) per 1% increase in the probability of being discharged alive, and savings of SAR11,989 (SAR11,277) for each day a patient is discharged alive. Conclusion: From the payer perspective, the addition of Favipiravir in moderately to severely ill COVID-19 patients was cost-savings over SC. Favipiravir was associated with a higher probability of discharging patients alive and lower daily spending on hospitalization than SC.

Retrospective evaluation of safety and effectiveness of same-day pegfilgrastim in patients with lung cancer.

Aim: To determine the incidence of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN) and related outcomes after same-day pegfilgrastim in lung cancer. Materials & methods: This single-center, retrospective study evaluated electronic health records of patients with lung cancer treated between 2013-2018. The main end points were incidence of FN and grade 3/4 neutropenia after the first and across all chemotherapy cycles. Results: A total of 114 patients received same-day pegfilgrastim in 384 cycles. The incidence of FN and grade 3/4 neutropenia was 2.3 and 25% after the first chemotherapy cycle and 1.6 and 10.4% across all cycles, respectively. Conclusion: Same-day prophylactic pegfilgrastim in patients with lung cancer may be a suitable option, owing to its low incidence of FN and related outcomes.

Chemotherapy is intended to kill fast-growing cancer cells but can also kill immune cells that are needed to prevent infections. When too many immune cells are killed by chemotherapy, patients with cancer may experience febrile neutropenia, a serious condition that can lead to death in the most severe cases. To prevent this side effect of chemotherapy, a protein that helps certain immune cells to grow (pegfilgrastim) is administered on the day after chemotherapy. To avoid a second clinic visit the day after receiving chemotherapy, it has become common to administer pegfilgrastim on the same day as chemotherapy. Whether this approach is as effective and safe as next-day administration is currently unclear. This study from the University of Arizona Cancer Center showed that in patients with lung cancer who receive chemotherapy, administration of pegfilgrastim on the same day as chemotherapy is a safe, effective method to prevent febrile neutropenia.

Economic analysis of glucagon like peptide-1 receptor agonists from the Saudi Arabia payer perspective.

Objectives: To perform a cost of control analysis of glucagon like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1RA) in Saudi Arabia (SA) and determine the economic impact of adopting GLP1RAs. Methods: A budget impact model that captures the cost of control model was constructed to simulate hypothetical patient on six treatment options: a current mix of 60% liraglutide and 40% dulaglutide, semaglutide, liraglutide, dulaglutide, exenatide, and lixisenatide. We estimated the relative amounts of SAR spend to achieve HbA1c targets (≤6.5% or < 7.0%). For each treatment option, annual treatment cost, proportion of patients achieving HbA1c targets, and cost to treat major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) were aggregated to estimate the cost of control per patient per year (CCPPPY) over 5-year horizon (2021-2025). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was performed as a confirmatory analysis. Results: The CCPPPY to achieve HbA1c ≤ 6.5%/<7.0% using current mix, semaglutide, liraglutide, dulaglutide, exenatide, and lixisenatide were SAR 17,097/SAR 14,113, SAR 12,889/SAR 11,123, SAR 15,594/SAR 12,892, SAR 19,184/SAR 15,940, SAR 580,211/SAR 380,936, and SAR 246,570/SAR 143,759, respectively. The relative amounts of SAR spend to achieve HbA1c ≤ 6.5%/<7.0% relative to 1 SAR on semaglutide in case of adopting current mix, liraglutide, dulaglutide, exenatide, and lixisenatide were SAR 1.42/SAR 1.18, SAR 1.30/SAR 1.07, SAR 1.60/SAR 1.33, SAR 48.33/SAR 31.73, and SAR 20.54/SAR 11.97, respectively. These results were confirmed in the PSA. Conclusions: Semaglutide 1 mg once weekly was the most economically favorable GLP1RA; associated with the least CCPPPY, and amount of SAR spent to achieve HbA1c of ≤6.50%/<7.00% versus all other GLP1RAs.

The use of direct oral anticoagulants for thromboprophylaxis or treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: a meta-analysis and review of the guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication among patients with cancer and is one of the most common causes of increased morbidity and mortality. The use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for thromboprophylaxis and treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (CA-VTE) has been evaluated in several randomized clinical trials (RCTs). The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess efficacy and safety of using DOACs for thromboprophylaxis and treatment of CA-VTE and provide a summary for available guidelines' recommendations. METHODS: MEDLINE was searched to identify studies evaluating the use of DOACs for thromboprophylaxis or treatment in patients with cancer. Search was limited to peer-reviewed studies published in English. Studies were excluded if they were not RCTs or subgroup analyses of data derived from RCTs, if they did not report efficacy and safety data on patients with active cancer, or if they were published as an abstract. New VTE or VTE recurrence, and major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB) were used to assess the efficacy and safety, respectively. The Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model risk ratios (RRs) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to estimate the pooled treatment effects of DOACs. RESULTS: Four studies evaluating DOACs use for thromboprophylaxis and four - for treatment of CA-VTE were included. Thromboprophylaxis with DOACs was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of symptomatic VTE (RR = 0.58; 95%CI 0.37,0.91) but with an incremental risk of major bleeding or CRNMB (RR = 1.57; 95%CI 1.10,2.26). CA-VTE treatment with DOACs was linked with a significant reduction in VTE recurrence (RR = 0.62; 95%CI 0.44,0.87) but with an incremental risk of CRNMB (RR = 1.58; 95%CI 1.11,2.24). CONCLUSIONS: The DOACs are associated with a lower risk of symptomatic VTE and VTE recurrence, but the risk of bleeding remains a considerable concern. Clinical decisions should be made by assessing individual patient's risk of VTE and bleeding.

Indirect comparison of glucagon like peptide-1 receptor agonists regarding cardiovascular safety and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) have shown that glucagon like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1RAs) have varying degrees of cardiovascular (CV) safety in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM.) The lack of any head-to-head comparative trials among GLP1RAs urged the need for an indirect comparison of these agents. Therefore, this study was conducted to indirectly compare the CV safety and mortality effects among different GLP1RAs in patients with T2DM using network meta-analysis (NMA). METHODS: Medline was searched to identify GLP1RA CVOTs to date. The outcomes of interest were CV death, myocardial infarction (IM), stroke, and death from any cause. An NMA with binomial likelihood logit link model was used for the binary outcomes. We conducted both fixed effects and random effects models for each outcome, and selected the best model based on the deviance information and the average posterior residual deviance. This NMA was reported in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA-NMA). RESULTS: A total of seven GLP1RA CVOTs were included having 56,004 patients. The NMA results showed that oral semaglutide was statistically better than exenatide (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.21-0.99), dulaglutide (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.20-0.97), albiglutide (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.19-0.97), lixisenatide (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.19-0.92) in reducing CV death events. No significant differences were detected between most of the treatments regarding reducing death from any cause, MI and stroke events. The ranking results showed that oral semaglutide had the highest probability to be ranked first (> 90%) in reducing CV death and death from any cause. Moreover, once weekly semaglutide had the highest probability to be ranked first in reducing MI and stroke events. CONCLUSION: The GLP1RAs have shown significant benefits in terms of CV safety. The indirect comparison and ranking probability results have shown that one weekly semaglutide and oral semaglutide seems to be the preferred option in patients with T2DM and established or at high risk of CVD. This result can aid health care providers, pharmacy and therapeutics committees in hospitals, and insurance companies when deciding which GLP1RA to start or add to their formulary.

Efficacy of olanzapine, neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists, and thalidomide in combination with palonosetron plus dexamethasone in preventing highly emetogenic chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Olanzapine, neurokinin-1-receptor-antagonists (NK-1-RA), and thalidomide added to palonosetron + dexamethasone (PALO-DEX) have been evaluated in separate studies as prophylaxis for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) due to highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). We conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis to compare the prophylactic efficacy of these agents in combination with PALO-DEX. METHODS: PubMed, Medline/Ovid, Embase, and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched from inception through 22 Mar 2018. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane methodology. A Bayesian network meta-analysis using random-effects models was used to asses complete response (CR) and rate of no nausea (RNN) in acute, delayed, and overall phases and were expressed as odds ratios (OR) and 95% credible interval (95% CrI). Ranking probabilities of treatments were calculated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to identify the probability of a given treatment as the best option against the worst option. RESULTS: Nine RCTs involving two thousand nine hundred fifty-nine patients were included. The olanzapine-based regimen showed greater CR in the acute, delayed, and overall-phases versus the PALO-DEX regimen (OR = 3.97, 95% CrI = 1.02-19.13; OR = 5.62, 95% CrI = 1.66-28.58; OR = 4.79, 95% CrI = 1.40-24.02, respectively). Additionally, it showed greater RNN than the NK-1-RA-based and the PALO-DEX regimens in the delayed phase only (OR = 2.90, 95% CrI = 1.34-5.15; OR = 4.53, 95% CrI = 1.89-10.55, respectively). Olanzapine-, NK-1-RA-, and thalidomide-based regimens did not differ in CR in the three phases. SUCRA probabilities ranked the olanzapine-based regimen as the best option in terms of CR and RNN, while ranking the NK-1-RA-based regimens as the second best option in terms of CR throughout the three phases. CONCLUSION: Based on the data included in the analyses, there is insufficient evidence to support adding thalidomide or NK-1-RA to PALO-DEX in preventing CINV induced by HEC. However, adding olanzapine to PALO-DEX achieves better CR and RNN. Olanzapine side-effects and the absence of direct comparisons explain why some guidelines are cautious in suggesting the use of olanzapine.

A comparison of the pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic strategies used to manage chronic pain: Opioid users versus nonusers.

BACKGROUND: Multimodal and multidomain strategies are currently recommended for the management of chronic pain. However, there is little information available on how individuals (opioid users versus nonusers) with chronic pain use multimodal strategies in pain management. METHODS: This cross-sectional study used questionnaire data from a sample of pharmacists with chronic pain. The questionnaire collected data on demographics, pain characteristics, pain management strategies, and pain management outcomes. The association between the number of strategies used and opioid use were evaluated by linear regression. Differences between the groups in nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) use and types of strategies used in managing the pain were analyzed using logistic regressions. A hierarchical logistic regression was performed to identify potential predictors differentiating opioid users from nonusers. RESULTS: Fifty-seven opioid users and 100 nonusers with chronic pain completed the questionnaire. Opioid users reported higher levels of pain at baseline (7.6 ± 1.7 vs. 6.7 ± 2.2; P = 0.011); however, pain levels after treatment were comparable (2.9 ± 1.9 vs. 3.2 ± 2.4; P = 0.33). Although there was no significant difference in the total number of strategies, the number of pharmacologic strategies was significantly higher in opioid users (P = 0.007). The type of pain management strategies and the use of NSAIDs were similar in both groups after adjusting for potential confounders. The significant predictors of opioid use from hierarchical logistic regression analysis were: lower use of over-the-counter NSAIDs (odds ratio [OR] 0.4; 95% CI 0.2-0.9), using more interventions (OR 1.2; 95% CI 1.1-1.3), reliance on pharmacologic strategies (OR 10.8; 95% CI 2.1-55.7), using combination of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic strategies (OR 3.7; 95% CI 0.9-15.8), and less interference with daily activities after treatment (OR 0.2; 95% CI 0.1-0.9). CONCLUSION: Opioid use was primarily related to the use of prescription pharmacologic strategies, but not to age or gender. Posttreatment pain levels were similar between opioid users and nonusers; however, opioid users used more nonopioid medications than nonusers did.

The landscape of biosimilars in Saudi Arabia: preparing for the next decade.

INTRODUCTION: The government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) has developed a well-defined strategy to restructure the health sector and operate on value-based principles. Biosimilars are a viable option for increasing accessibility while lowering health-care costs. AREAS COVERED: We describe the current and future biosimilar landscape in KSA. We discuss the growth of the biosimilar market, the regulatory approval process, biosimilar adoption, and the potential impact on health-care systems and patient outcomes. EXPERT OPINION: The biosimilar market in KSA is expanding and expected to continue this trajectory in the coming decade. The growth of the market is influenced by the KSA health transformation initiative, the well-defined regulatory framework for biosimilars set by the Saudi Food and Drug Authority (SFDA), and the adoption of biosimilars by health-care providers. Overall, the biosimilar regulation is evolving and the future of biosimilars looks promising in KSA. Biosimilars offer a more cost-effective alternative, which can help to expand access to more treatment options for patients and contribute to cost saving for the health-care system.

Comparative effectiveness of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists for the management of obesity in adults without diabetes: A network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Tirzepatide is a new glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) that has shown promising results for weight loss. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of GLP-1RAs for obesity management. Embase and MEDLINE were searched looking for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy of GLP-1RAs for weight loss in patients without diabetes. The main efficacy outcomes evaluated were the mean change in actual and percentage weight loss and the proportion of patients with weight loss of ≥5%-20%. Main safety outcomes evaluated include nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, constipation, loss of appetite, pancreatitis, gallbladder-related disorders, and withdrawal due to adverse events. Seven RCTs with more than 12,300 patients were analyzed, including patients with body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m2 , or BMI ≥ 27 kg/m2 with comorbidities. Weekly tirzepatide 10 and 15 mg resulted in more weight loss than weekly semaglutide 2.4 mg, daily semaglutide 0.4 mg, or liraglutide 3 mg. Tirzepatide and weekly semaglutide demonstrated comparable results but with significantly higher odds of achieving ≥5%-20% weight loss compared with liraglutide. GLP-1RAs triggered more gastrointestinal adverse events than placebo, with no in-between difference. Although all GLP-1RAs lead to significant weight reduction, tirzepatide was associated with better efficacy outcomes while having a comparable safety profile.

Cost-efficiency analysis and expanded treatment access modeling of conversion to rituximab biosimilars from reference rituximab in Jordan.

AIM: To assess the cost-efficiency and expanded access of three rituximab biosimilars versus the reference rituximab from the perspective of the Jordanian national health payer. METHODS: A 1-year cost-efficiency and expanded access model of conversion from reference rituximab (Mabthera) to the approved biosimilars (Truxima, Rixathon, and Tromax) to assess five metrics: total annual cost to treat a hypothetical patient; head-to-head cost comparison; changes in patients' access to rituximab; number-needed-to-convert (NNC) to provide an additional 10 patients access to a rituximab treatment; and relative amount of Jordanian Dinar (JOD) spent on rituximab options. The model included rituximab doses at 100 mg/10 ml and 500 mg/50 ml and considered both cost-saving and cost-wastage scenarios. Costs of treatments were based on the fiscal year 2022 tender prices received by the Joint Procurement Department (JPD). RESULTS: Rixathon was associated with the lowest average annual cost per patient (JOD2,860) across all six indications among all rituximab comparators, followed by Truxima (JOD4,240), Tromax (JOD4,365) and reference Mabthera (JOD11,431). The highest percentage of patient access to rituximab treatment (321%) was achieved when switching patients from Mabthera to Rixathon in the RA and PV indications. At four patients, Rixathon was associated with the lowest NNC to provide an additional 10 patients access to rituximab treatment. For each JOD1 spent on Rixathon, an additional JOD3.21 must be spent on Mabthera, an additional JOD0.55 on Tromax, and an additional JOD0.53 on Truxima. CONCLUSION: Rituximab biosimilars were associated with cost savings in all approved indications in Jordan compared to reference rituximab. Rixathon was associated with the lowest annual cost, the highest percentage of expanded patient access for all six indications, and the lowest NNC providing 10 additional patients with access.

Incidence of Diabetic Ketoacidosis Among Pediatrics With Type 1 Diabetes Prior to and During COVID-19 Pandemic: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies.

Background: Previous reports suggest that the Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic might have affected incidences of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and new diagnoses of type 1 diabetes. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the risk of DKA, including severe DKA, during the COVID-19 pandemic versus the prior-to-COVID-19 period among pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes. Methods: PubMed and EMBASE were searched for observational studies investigating the risk of DKA among pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes during the COVID-19 pandemic and the prior-to-COVID-19 period. A random meta-analysis model was performed to estimate the relative risk of DKA during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to before the pandemic. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on the type 1 diabetes status, established or newly diagnosed. In addition, sensitivity analysis was conducted for studies that reported results from adjusted analysis for potential confounders using fixed effect model. Results: A total of 20 observational studies reported the risk of DKA, of which 18 reported the risk of severe DKA. The risks of DKA and severe DKA were 35% (RR 1.35, 95%CI 1.2-1.53, I2 = 71%) and 76% (RR 1.76, 95%CI 1.33-2.33, I2 = 44%) higher in the during-COVID-19 group compared to the prior-to-COVID-19 group, respectively. Among patients with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes, the risk of DKA was 44% higher for the during-COVID-19 group compared to the prior-to-COVID-19 group (RR 1.44, 95%CI 1.26-1.65; I2 = 64%). Only two studies reported the risk of DKA among patients with established type 1 diabetes and the cumulative risk was not statistically significant. In the sensitivity analysis, four studies reported an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of the risk of DKA during COVID-19 compared to the prior-to-COVID-19 period. The fixed estimate from the meta-analysis found an increase in the risk of DKA in the during-COVID-19 group compared to the prior-to-COVID-19 group (aOR 2.04, 95%CI 1.66-2.50). Conclusions: This study showed that DKA risk, especially the risk of severe DKA, has increased significantly during the pandemic. Healthcare systems must be aware and prepared for such an increase in DKA cases and take all necessary measures to prevent future spikes during the pandemic. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=272775, identifier PROSPERO [CRD42021272775].

Comparative Risk of Acute Kidney Injury Following Concurrent Administration of Vancomycin with Piperacillin/Tazobactam or Meropenem: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies.

The study aims to comparatively assess the nephrotoxicity of vancomycin when combined with piperacillin-tazobactam (V + PT) or meropenem (V + M) in adult patients hospitalized in general wards or intensive care units. We searched MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and Web of Science for observational studies evaluating incidences of AKI in adult patients receiving V + PT or V + M for at least 48 h in general wards or intensive care units. The primary outcome was AKI events, while the secondary outcomes were hospital length of stay, need for renal replacement therapy (RRT), and mortality events. The odds ratio (OR), or mean difference for the hospital length of stay, with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) from the inverse variance weighting random-effects model were estimated for the risk of AKI, RRT, and mortality. Of the 112 studies identified, twelve observational studies were included in this meta-analysis with a total of 14,511 patients. The odds of having AKI were significantly higher in patients receiving V + PT compared with V + M (OR = 2.31; 95%CI 1.69-3.15). There were no differences between V + PT and V + M in the hospital length of stay, RRT, or mortality outcomes. Thus, clinicians should be vigilant while using V + PT, especially in patients who are at high risk of AKI.

17-Alpha-Hydroxyprogesterone vs. Placebo for Preventing of Recurrent Preterm Birth: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.

Background: Preterm birth (PTB) is a leading cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality. Objective: To estimate the effect of 17-alpha-hydroxyprogesterone caproate (17-OHPC) compared to placebo in singleton gestations for reducing the risk of recurrent PTB and neonatal morbidity and mortality. Work Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Search Strategy: Searching MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library, and clinical trial registries. Selection Criteria: Randomized controlled trials of singleton gestations with a history of PTB and treated with a weekly intramuscular injection of 17-OHPC or placebo. Data Collection and Analysis: A random meta-analysis model was performed for the PTB outcomes (<32, <35, and <37 weeks) and neonatal outcomes (neonatal death, grade 3 or 4 intraventricular hemorrhage, respiratory distress syndrome, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, necrotizing enterocolitis, and sepsis). Effect estimates were measured by relative risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Main Results: Six works were included. There were no statistically significant reductions in the PTB risk following the use of 17-OHPC at <32 weeks (RR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.13-2.77, and I 2 = 39%), <35weeks (RR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.10-3.67, and I 2 = 51%), and <37 weeks (RR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.46-1, and I 2 = 75%). Furthermore, all the neonatal outcomes were statistically similar between the two groups. Conclusion: Treatment with 17-OHPC is not associated with reducing the risk of PTB or neonatal outcomes compared to placebo.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors-associated risk of immune-related hypothyroidism in older patients with advanced melanoma: a real-world analysis of US SEER-Medicare data.

Background: The risk of immune-related(ir)-hypothyroidism in older patients with advanced melanoma treated with anti-CTLA4 or anti-PD1 therapies is poorly understood, especially in the real-world setting.Research design and methods: We identified older patients (≥65 years) diagnosed with advanced melanoma between 2011-2015 and treated with anti-CTLA4 or anti-PD1 agents in the SEER-Medicare database. Applying probability-of-treatment-weighting for confounder adjustment and proportional hazards models, we estimated the risk of ir-hypothyroidism between treatment initiation and up to 90 days from last dose between anti-PD1 and anti-CTLA4 users.Results: Of 210 older patients with advanced melanoma identified, 164 received anti-CTLA4 (ipilimumab) and 46 anti-PD1 agents (11 nivolumab, 35 pembrolizumab). There was no statistically significant difference in ir-hypothyroidism risk between anti-PD1 and anti-CTLA4 users (HR=2.15, 95%CI=0.83-5.53). Pairwise medication comparisons showed a lower risk among ipilimumab versus nivolumab (HR=0.15, 95%CI=0.06-0.40) and pembrolizumab versus nivolumab users (HR=0.13, 95%CI=0.03-0.55). Sensitivity analyses using an all-stages melanoma cohort did not show a difference in ir-hypothyroidism risk between medication classes and individual medications.Conclusions:This retrospective claims data analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in ir-hypothyroidism risk between anti-CTLA4 or anti-PD1 users. However, patients with advanced melanoma treated with ipilimumab or pembrolizumab may have a lower ir-hypothyroidism risk compared to nivolumab users.

Association of immune-checkpoint inhibitors and the risk of immune-related colitis among elderly patients with advanced melanoma: real-world evidence from the SEER-Medicare database.

BACKGROUND: The use of anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (anti-CTLA4) therapy (ipilimumab) and anti-programmed cell-death 1 (anti-PD1) agents (nivolumab and pembrolizumab) in advanced melanoma have been associated with immune-related adverse events (irAEs) including colitis. We aimed to estimate the incidence and the risk of colitis in elderly patients with advanced melanoma treated with anti-CTLA4 and anti-PD1 in the real-world setting. METHODS: Elderly patients (age ⩾ 65 years) diagnosed with advanced melanoma between 2011 and 2015 and treated with anti-CTLA4 or anti-PD1 agents were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data. We estimated the risk of colitis from start of treatment up to 90 days from the last dose of therapy. We used the log-rank test and logistic regression with adjustment for potential confounders using the inverse probability of treatment weighting method. We conducted several sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: A total of 274 elderly patients with advanced melanoma were included in our cohort. The risk of colitis was similar between anti-PD1 users and anti-CTLA4 users based on log-rank test (p = 0.17) and logistic regression [odds ratio (OR) = 0.35, 95% confidence interval (95%CI) 0.04-2.79]. Sensitivity analyses for patients with all-stage melanoma showed a significantly lower risk of colitis in anti-PD1 compared with anti-CTLA4 treated patients based on log-rank test (p = 0.017) and logistic regression (OR = 0.21, 95%CI 0.09-0.53). CONCLUSION: Elderly with advanced melanoma treated with anti-CTLA4 or anti-PD1 had a similar risk of developing colitis. However, there was a statistically significant difference in the risk of colitis between anti-CTLA4 or anti-PD1 users among all-stage-melanoma patients. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Risk of colitis (inflammation of the large intestine) in elderly patients with melanoma treated with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (a group of medications that uses the patient's immune system to fight cancer) While the anti-cancer agents known as immune-checkpoint inhibitors have had a great impact on the treatment of melanoma, they may also have side effects. This study estimated the risk of colitis, a chronic inflammation of the colon, in elderly patients with melanoma treated with anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (anti-CTLA4) or anti-programmed cell-death 1 (anti-PD1) agents, using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database. Overall, we found that the risk of colitis was not different between anti-PD1 users and anti-CTLA4 users with advanced-stage melanoma. However, after including patients across all stages of melanoma, we found a significantly lower risk of colitis with anti-PD1 compared with anti-CTLA4.

Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of Apixaban versus Warfarin in Patients with Acute Venous Thromboembolism: Experience of a Large Tertiary Hospital in Saudi Arabia.

PURPOSE: The main objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of apixaban versus warfarin in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) in a "real-world" setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from a large tertiary hospital in Saudi Arabia. Patients were included if they were adults (≥18 years), diagnosed with VTE, and treated with either apixaban or warfarin between January 2016 and September 2018. Patients who had received anticoagulation therapy within three months of the date of the index event were excluded. The effectiveness outcomes were incidence of VTE recurrence (ie, deep vein thrombosis DVT or pulmonary embolism [PE]), while the safety outcome was incidence of any major bleeding (MB) event within 90 days of follow-up. RESULTS: Among the 492 patients included for study, 212 (43.1%) received apixaban and 280 (56.1%) received warfarin. The mean age of patients was 53.6±19.1 years and 62% of the cohort was female. Comparable rates of VTE recurrence were observed for apixaban and warfarin treatment groups during follow-up (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) =0.95; 95% CI 0.53-1.68), including DVT (AOR=1.06; 95% CI 0.52-2.17) and PE (AOR=0.78; 95% CI 0.31-1.96). However, apixaban was associated with significantly fewer MB events than warfarin (AOR=0.18; 95% CI 0.04-0.83). CONCLUSION: The use of apixaban for the treatment of Saudi patients with acute VTE is associated with a VTE recurrence rate comparable to that of warfarin, with significantly fewer MB events.

Potential Immune-Related Adverse Events Associated With Monotherapy and Combination Therapy of Ipilimumab, Nivolumab, and Pembrolizumab for Advanced Melanoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: The use of ipilimumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab as monotherapies or in combination has transformed the management of advanced melanoma even though these drugs are associated with a new profile of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). The incidence of irAEs from clinical trials of these agents is an important factor for clinicians when treating patients with advanced melanoma. In the current study, we aimed to profile the incidence of potential irAEs of these agents when used as monotherapy and as combination therapy. Methods: We searched the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases; clinicaltrials.gov; and websites of regulatory agencies in the USA, Europe, Australia, and Japan for phase 1-3 trials of ipilimumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab for advanced melanoma. Random effect meta-analysis was utilized to profile the incidence of potential irAEs. Results: A total of 58 reports of 35 trials including 6,331 patients with advanced melanoma and reporting irAE data were included in the meta-analyses. We found higher incidences of potential irAEs in combination therapies vs. monotherapies for most of the types of irAEs. Among the monotherapies, ipilimumab users had the most frequent incidence of potential irAEs related to the gastrointestinal system (diarrhea, 29%; and colitis, 8%) and skin (rash, 31%; pruritus, 27%; and dermatitis, 10%), with hypophysitis in 4% of the patients. The most frequent potential irAEs among nivolumab users were maculopapular rash (13%), erythema (4%), hepatitis (3%), and infusion-related reactions (3%), while they were arthralgia (12%), hypothyroidism (8%), and hyperglycemia (6%), among pembrolizumab users. Conclusion: Especially the combination therapies tend to elevate the incidence of potential irAEs. Clinicians should be vigilant about irAEs following combination therapy as well as gastrointestinal and skin irAEs following ipilimumab therapy, in addition to being aware of potential irAEs leading to hyperglycemia, thyroid, hepatic, and musculoskeletal disorders following nivolumab and pembrolizumab therapy.

Safety and efficacy of dual versus triple antithrombotic therapy (DAT vs TAT) in patients with atrial fibrillation following a PCI: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Creating an appropriate antithrombotic therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains a dilemma. Several clinical trials compared the use of a dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT) regimen with a direct oral anticoagulants including (apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban or rivaroxaban) and a P2Y12 inhibitor versus a triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT) that includes a vitamin K antagonist plus aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor in patients with AF who have undergone PCI. However, there are no head-to-head trials comparing the DAT regimens to each other. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of DAT regimens using a network meta-analysis (NMA) approach. DESIGN: A systematic review and NMA of randomised clinical trials. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review to identify relevant randomised clinical trials and performed a Bayesian NMA for International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) major or clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding, all-cause mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI) and stent thrombosis outcomes. We used NetMetaXL V.1.6.1 and WinBUGS V.1.4.3 for the NMA and estimated the probability of ranking the treatments based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve. RESULTS: The comparison between DAT regimens showed no significant difference in the safety or efficacy outcomes. Apixaban regimen was ranked first as the preferred therapy in terms of ISTH major or CRNM bleeding and stroke, with a probability of 52% and 54%, respectively. Rivaroxaban regimen was the preferred therapy in terms of MI and stent thrombosis, with a probability of 34% and 27%, respectively. Dabigatran regimen was ranked first in terms of all-cause mortality, with a probability of 28%. CONCLUSION: The DAT regimens are as safe and effective as TAT regimens. However, ranking probabilities for the best option in the selected outcomes can be used to guide the selection among these agents based on different patients' conditions.