Phase 1 study of safety and tolerability of an oral contraceptive containing low-dose ethinyl oestradiol combined with glecaprevir/pibrentasvir treatment in healthy premenopausal women.

Glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (GLE/PIB) is an approved guideline-recommended chronic hepatitis C virus infection treatment. GLE/PIB coadministration with ethinyl oestradiol (EE) is not recommended in current labels owing to a Phase 1 study observing Grade ≥2 alanine aminotransferase (ALT) elevation in 2 out of 12 healthy women cotreated for 11 days with GLE/PIB and oral contraceptive (OC) containing 35 µg/250 µg EE/norgestimate. No Grade ≥2 elevation was observed with low-dose (20 µg) EE (n = 14). This Phase 1 study examined safety/tolerability of GLE/PIB coadministered with an OC containing low-dose EE using a larger sample size and longer treatment duration. Healthy premenopausal women were treated with EE/levonorgestrel alone (20/100 µg, Cycles 1-2), followed by coadministration with GLE/PIB (300/120 mg; Cycles 3-4). A safety criterion of special interest was a confirmed Grade ≥2 ALT elevation (>3× upper normal limit). Adverse events (AEs) and study drugs concentrations were examined. Of 85 enrolled women, 72 initiated combined GLE/PIB + EE/levonorgestrel treatment, 66 completed the study and 19 discontinued prematurely (non-safety reason, n = 16; AE [deemed unelated to GLE/PIB], n = 3). No participant met the safety criterion of special interest of confirmed Grade ≥2 ALT elevation. No serious/Grade ≥3 AEs were reported. Study drug concentrations were within the expected ranges. GLE/PIB in combination with an OC containing low-dose EE was generally well tolerated with no confirmed Grade ≥2 ALT elevation and no evidence of drug-induced liver injury. No pattern to the reported AEs and no new safety issues were identified. This was a Phase 1 study of healthy volunteers, not a registered clinical trial.

Reported adverse events related to use of hepatitis C virus direct-acting antivirals with opioids: 2017-2021.

INTRODUCTION: Due to concerns over potential interactions between some hepatitis C direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) and opioids, we describe adverse event (AE) reports of concomitant use of opioids and DAAs. METHODS: AEs reported (July 28, 2017-December 31, 2021) with the administration of the DAAs glecaprevir/pibrentasvir, sofosbuvir/velpatasvir, ledipasvir/sofosbuvir, sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir, and elbasvir/grazoprevir as suspect products were downloaded from the US Food and Drug Administration AE Reporting System Public Dashboard. The number of AE reports containing opioids (fentanyl, hydrocodone, oxycodone) as co-suspect products/concomitant products were counted and summarized by severity, reporting country and whether an outcome of death was reported. Overdose AEs were counted irrespective of opioid use, and changes over time were assessed. RESULTS: In total, 40 AEs were reported for DAAs and concomitant fentanyl use, 25 (62.5%) were in the USA, 35 (87.5%) were considered serious, and 14 (35.0%) resulted in death; and 626 were reported with concomitant oxycodone/hydrocodone use, 596 (95.2%) were in the USA, 296 (47.3%) were considered serious, and 28 (4.5%) resulted in death. There were 196 overdose AEs (32 [16%] deaths) declining from 2018 (N = 56) to 2021 (N = 29). CONCLUSIONS: Treating people with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection who use drugs is key to achieving HCV elimination. Low numbers of DAA AE reports with opioids may provide reassurance to prioritize HCV treatment in this population. These data contribute to evidence supporting the continued scale-up of DAA treatment among people who use drugs to achieve HCV elimination goals.

Safety analysis of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir in patients with markers of advanced liver disease in clinical and real-world cohorts.

Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection has the greatest health impact in patients with advanced liver disease. The direct-acting antiviral (DAA) regimen glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (G/P) is approved for treatment of HCV-infected patients without cirrhosis and with compensated cirrhosis. However, events of liver decompensation/failure have been reported in patients treated with protease-inhibitor-containing DAA regimens, often in patients with advanced liver disease. This study examines the safety of on-label G/P treatment in patients with compensated cirrhosis (F4 at baseline) with markers of advanced liver disease. Patients with cirrhosis were categorized into 4 subgroups, based on different noninvasive markers of advanced liver disease identified using laboratory measures: platelet count < or ≥ 100 × 109 /L, and Child-Pugh score 5 or 6. Separate analyses were performed using pooled data from clinical trials and from real-world post-marketing observational studies. G/P was well tolerated in patients with platelet count ≥100 × 109 /L (n = 800), platelet count <100 × 109 /L (n = 215), a Child-Pugh score of 5 (n = 915) and a Child-Pugh score of 6 (n = 95). In the clinical trial and real-world cohorts two patients and no patients experienced a serious adverse event (AE) possibly related to study drug, respectively; three patients and no patients experienced an AE of special interest for hepatic decompensation and hepatic failure. This analysis reaffirms G/P's safety profile in indicated patients with compensated cirrhosis, including those with markers of more advanced liver disease. Increasing the number of patients treated with short-duration G/P therapy may contribute to meeting HCV elimination targets.

Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Efficacy of Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir in Children With Chronic HCV: Part 2 of the DORA Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (GLE/PIB) has shown high efficacy and safety in chronic HCV-infected adults and adolescents; data in children were limited. DORA part 2 is a phase 2/3, nonrandomized, open-label study evaluating the pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety of a pediatric formulation of GLE and PIB in children ages 3 to < 12 years. APPROACH AND RESULTS: Children with chronic HCV infection, genotype 1-6, with or without compensated cirrhosis, were divided into three cohorts by age-cohort 2 (9 to < 12 years), cohort 3 (6 to < 9 years), and cohort 4 (3 to < 6 years)-and given weight-based doses of GLE and PIB for 8, 12, or 16 weeks. Primary endpoints were sustained virologic response at posttreatment week 12 (SVR12) and steady-state exposure; secondary endpoints were rates of persistent viremia, relapse, and reinfection. Safety and laboratory abnormalities were assessed. Final pediatric dosages determined to be efficacious were 250 mg GLE + 100 mg PIB (in children weighing ≥ 30 to < 45 kg), 200 mg GLE + 80 mg PIB (≥ 20 to < 30 kg), and 150 mg GLE + 60 mg PIB (12 to < 20 kg). Of 80 participants enrolled and dosed, 96% (77/80) achieved SVR12. One participant, on the initial dose ratio, relapsed by posttreatment week 4; no participants had virologic failures on the final dose ratio of GLE 50 mg/PIB 20 mg. Two nonresponders prematurely discontinued the study. Most adverse events (AEs) were mild; no drug-related serious AEs occurred. Pharmacokinetic exposures were comparable to those of adults. CONCLUSIONS: A pediatric formulation of GLE/PIB was highly efficacious and well tolerated in chronic HCV-infected children 3 to < 12 years old.

Candidate biomarkers for the diagnosis and prognosis of drug-induced liver injury: An international collaborative effort.

Current blood biomarkers are suboptimal in detecting drug-induced liver injury (DILI) and predicting its outcome. We sought to characterize the natural variabilty and performance characteristics of 14 promising DILI biomarker candidates. Serum or plasma from multiple cohorts of healthy volunteers (n = 192 and n = 81), subjects who safely took potentially hepatotoxic drugs without adverse effects (n = 55 and n = 92) and DILI patients (n = 98, n = 28, and n = 143) were assayed for microRNA-122 (miR-122), glutamate dehydrogenase (GLDH), total cytokeratin 18 (K18), caspase cleaved K18, glutathione S-transferase α, alpha-fetoprotein, arginase-1, osteopontin (OPN), sorbitol dehydrogenase, fatty acid binding protein, cadherin-5, macrophage colony-stimulating factor receptor (MCSFR), paraoxonase 1 (normalized to prothrombin protein), and leukocyte cell-derived chemotaxin-2. Most candidate biomarkers were significantly altered in DILI cases compared with healthy volunteers. GLDH correlated more closely with gold standard alanine aminotransferase than miR-122, and there was a surprisingly wide inter- and intra-individual variability of miR-122 levels among healthy volunteers. Serum K18, OPN, and MCSFR levels were most strongly associated with liver-related death or transplantation within 6 months of DILI onset. Prediction of prognosis among DILI patients using the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease was improved by incorporation of K18 and MCSFR levels. Conclusion: GLDH appears to be more useful than miR-122 in identifying DILI patients, and K18, OPN, and MCSFR are promising candidates for prediction of prognosis during an acute DILI event. Serial assessment of these biomarkers in large prospective studies will help further delineate their role in DILI diagnosis and management.

Fasiglifam for glycaemic control in people with type 2 diabetes: A phase III, placebo-controlled study.

AIM: To investigate the effect of fasiglifam on glycaemic control in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: In total, 421 people with T2DM and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥7.0% and ≤10.5% who had received only diet and exercise treatment for ≥12 weeks prior to screening were randomized to receive fasiglifam 25 or 50 mg or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in HbA1c at week 24. RESULTS: The mean participant age was 53.5 years, mean baseline body mass index 32.3 kg/m2 , and mean baseline HbA1c level 8.05%. Least squares mean changes in HbA1c from baseline to week 24 were: -0.93% (fasiglifam 50 mg), -0.65% (fasiglifam 25 mg) and -0.17% (placebo). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 53.3%, 48.2% and 39.9% of participants receiving fasiglifam 25 mg, fasiglifam 50 mg, and placebo, respectively. Three participants in each group experienced a serious adverse event (AE). Nine participants had alanine aminotransferase (ALT) elevations >3× upper limit of normal: 5 (3.6%) in the fasiglifam 25-mg group, 4 (2.8%) in the fasiglifam 50-mg group, and none in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: The data indicate that fasiglifam effectively reduced HbA1c from baseline for 24 weeks in participants with T2DM. The incidence of TEAEs was higher in the fasiglifam groups; however, the incidence of serious AEs was low overall and similar between groups. ALT elevations were observed only in the fasiglifam groups, which contributed to the decision to terminate the fasiglifam programme after completion of the present study.

Combining the G-protein-coupled receptor 40 agonist fasiglifam with sitagliptin improves glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes with or without metformin: A randomized, 12-week trial.

AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of fasiglifam, an orally active G-protein-coupled receptor 40 agonist, in combination with the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor sitagliptin, in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with diet/exercise (± metformin). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, phase II study, 368 patients received once-daily placebo, sitagliptin 100 mg, fasiglifam 25 or 50 mg, or the combination of sitagliptin 100 mg plus fasiglifam 25 or 50 mg. The primary endpoint was change from baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) at 12 weeks; a key secondary endpoint was change in fasting plasma glucose (FPG). RESULTS: The fasiglifam 25 and 50 mg combination regimens produced significantly greater HbA1c reductions than sitagliptin (treatment differences of -0.45% and -0.61%; P < .01, respectively) or respective doses of fasiglifam monotherapy (-0.43% and -0.48%; P < .01) and significantly greater FPG reductions than sitagliptin (-1.1 mmol/L for both combination regimens; P < .01). Improved glycaemic control occurred by week 1 for FPG and week 4 for HbA1c in all groups. Hypoglycaemia rates were low (≤3.3%) and similar across treatments. Liver enzymes >3 × upper limit of normal occurred in four patients (fasiglifam 25 mg, n = 1; fasiglifam 50 mg, n = 2; 1 fasiglifam/sitagliptin 50/100 mg, n = 1). CONCLUSIONS: Combination of fasiglifam and sitagliptin provided significant additional effects on glycaemic control, with hypoglycaemia rates similar to placebo with or without metformin. This study provides supportive clinical evidence for the complementary mechanism of actions of this GPR40 agonist and DPP-4 inhibitor.

Liver toxicity in oncology trials and beyond: a simplified concept for management of hepatocellular drug-induced liver injury in patients with abnormal baseline liver tests.

BACKGROUND: Management of side effects in clinical trials has to balance generation of meaningful data with risk for patients. A toxicity area requiring detailed management guidelines is drug-induced liver injury (DILI). In oncology trials, patients are often included despite baseline liver test abnormalities, for whom there is no consensus yet on levels of liver test changes that should trigger action, such as drug interruption or discontinuation. METHODS: We provide an innovative approach to manage hepatocellular DILI in oncology trials for patients with abnormal baseline alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels. The algorithm proposed is based on mathematical derivation of action thresholds from those generally accepted for patients with normal baselines. RESULTS: The resulting algorithm is grouped by level of baseline abnormality and avoids calculation of baseline multiples. Suggested layered action levels are 4, 6, and 11 × Upper Limit of Normal (ULN) for patients with baseline ALT between 1.5 and 3 × ULN, and 6, 8, and 12 × ULN for patients with baseline ALT between 3 and 5 × ULN, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our concept and resulting algorithm are consistent, transparent, and easy to follow, and the method for derivation from consensus-based thresholds may also be applicable to other drug toxicity areas.

Industry Review of Best Practices for Risk Management of Drug-Induced Liver Injury from Development to Real-World Use.

The relative treatment benefit of a drug for patients during development, marketing authorization review, or after approval includes an assessment of the risk of drug-induced liver injury (DILI). In this article, the Pharmacovigilance and Risk Mitigation Working Group of the IQ-DILI Initiative launched in June 2016 within the International Consortium for Innovation and Quality in Pharmaceutical Development presents and reviews three key topics for essential risk management activities to identify, characterize, monitor, mitigate, and communicate DILI risk associated with small molecules during drug development. The three topics are: (1) Current best practices for characterizing the DILI phenotype and the severity and incidence of DILI in the treatment population, including DILI identification, prediction and recovery. (2) Characterization of the relative treatment benefit for patients who will be exposed to a drug and the attendant risk of DILI in conjunction with existing global risk mitigation strategies. (3) Implementation of risk mitigation strategies during drug development highlighting patient factors, healthcare settings and site of product administration, and prescriber and healthcare provider factors. Industry guidance is provided for assessing whether the product labeling is sufficient to minimize the risk of DILI or whether a United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) or European Medicines Agency (EMA) Risk Management Plan (RMP) with additional Risk Minimization Measures (aRMM) is needed.

The relative treatment benefit of a drug for patients during development, marketing authorization review or after approval includes an assessment of the risk of drug-induced liver injury (DILI). Reported incidences of DILI range from 0.74 to 19 per 100,000, and laboratory criteria and/or clinical outcome determine the severity of DILI. At least 10% of patients who develop jaundice caused by DILI (Hy's Law cases) develop liver failure (i.e., severe DILI). A drug's liver safety profile can be assessed using Evaluation of Drug-Induced Serious Hepatotoxicity Plots. Specific recommendations for monitoring DILI in the post-marketing setting depend on characterization of the phenotype during drug development. Risk mitigation tools include additional educational mechanisms, and risk minimization measures include Elements To Assure Safe Use (ETASU) for healthcare professionals, administration sites, and patients. The overall aim of risk management is to ensure that the benefit of a particular product exceeds the risks as far as possible for the individual patient and for the target population.

TAK-875 versus placebo or glimepiride in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Activation of free fatty acid receptor 1 (FFAR1; also known as G-protein-coupled receptor 40) by fatty acids stimulated glucose-dependent ß-cell insulin secretion in preclinical models. We aimed to assess whether selective pharmacological activation of this receptor by TAK-875 in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus improved glycaemic control without hypoglycaemia risk. METHODS: We undertook a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, and placebo-controlled and active-comparator-controlled trial in outpatients with type 2 diabetes who had not responded to diet or metformin treatment. Patients were randomly assigned equally to receive placebo, TAK-875 (6·25, 25, 50, 100, or 200 mg), or glimepiride (4 mg) once daily for 12 weeks. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was change in haemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) from baseline. Analysis included all patients randomly assigned to treatment groups who received at least one dose of double-blind study drug. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01007097. FINDINGS: 426 patients were randomly assigned to TAK-875 (n=303), placebo (n=61), and glimepiride (n=62). At week 12, significant least-squares mean reductions in HbA(1c) from baseline occurred in all TAK-875 (ranging from -1·12% [SE 0·113] with 50 mg to -0·65% [0·114] with 6·25 mg) and glimepiride (-1·05% [SE 0·111]) groups versus placebo (-0·13% [SE 0·115]; p value range 0·001 to <0·0001). Treatment-emergent hypoglycaemic events were similar in the TAK-875 and placebo groups (2% [n=7, all TAK-875 groups] vs 3% [n=2]); significantly higher rates were reported in the glimepiride group (19% [n=12]; p value range 0·010-0·002 vs all TAK-875 groups). Incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar in the TAK-875 overall (49%; n=147, all TAK-875 groups) and placebo groups (48%, n=29) and was lower than in the glimepiride group (61%, n=38). INTERPRETATION: TAK-875 significantly improved glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes with minimum risk of hypoglycaemia. The results show that activation of FFAR1 is a viable therapeutic target for treatment of type 2 diabetes. FUNDING: Takeda Global Research and Development.

Safety of Patients with Hepatitis C Virus Treated with Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir from Clinical Trials and Real-World Cohorts.

INTRODUCTION: More than 70 million people are estimated to be infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) globally. If left untreated, HCV infection can lead to complications such as extensive liver fibrosis, cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Evolution of treatments has resulted in highly effective and well-tolerated all-oral direct-acting antivirals. The pangenotypic regimen of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir is approved for treating HCV for patients without cirrhosis or with compensated cirrhosis (CC). Guidelines have evolved to simplify treatment to enable non-specialists to manage and treat HCV-infected patients. Simultaneously, such treatment algorithms provide guidance on the pretreatment identification of small subsets of patients who may require specialist treatment and long-term follow-up for advanced liver disease, including those at risk of developing HCC. This study describes the safety profile of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir in patients identified using previously described noninvasive laboratory measures who may be eligible for treatment by non-liver specialists. METHODS: This post hoc analysis of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir in patients, identified by noninvasive laboratory measures, intended to exclude patients with advanced liver disease and severe renal impairment, who can be managed within non-liver specialist settings. Patients were included from clinical trials and real-world studies of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir for HCV treatment. Baseline demographics, clinical characteristics, and safety assessments, including adverse events and laboratory abnormalities, were summarized. RESULTS: Data across these large-scale studies confirm that glecaprevir/pibrentasvir is well tolerated across different patient populations, with fewer than 0.1% of patients experiencing a serious adverse event related to treatment drugs, and few patients developing HCC during or after treatment. CONCLUSION: The safety profile of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir enhances the confidence of non-liver specialists to treat the majority of HCV-infected patients, and provides an opportunity to expand the treater pool, potentially increasing diagnosis and treatment rates for HCV, contributing to elimination of HCV.

Real-World Outcomes in Historically Underserved Patients with Chronic Hepatitis C Infection Treated with Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir.

INTRODUCTION: Glecaprevir/pibrentasvir is approved for treating chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotypes (GT) 1-6. We evaluated real-world effectiveness, safety, and patient-reported outcomes of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir in underserved patient populations, focusing on persons who use drugs infected with HCV. METHODS: Data were pooled from nine countries (13 November 2017-31 January 2020). Patients had HCV GT1-6, with or without compensated cirrhosis, with or without prior HCV treatment and received glecaprevir/pibrentasvir consistent with local label at their physician's discretion. Patients with prior direct-acting antiviral exposure were excluded from efficacy and quality-of-life analyses. The percentage of patients achieving sustained virologic response at post-treatment week 12 (SVR12) was assessed. Mean changes from baseline to SVR12 visit in 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey mental and physical component summary scores were reported. Safety was assessed in patients receiving at least one dose of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir. RESULTS: Of 2036 patients, 1701 (83.5%) received 8-week glecaprevir/pibrentasvir. In 1684 patients with sufficient follow-up, SVR12 rates were 98.0% (1651/1684) overall, 98.1% (1432/1459) in 8-week treated patients, 97.0% (519/535) in persons who use drugs, and greater than 95% across subgroups. Mean changes from baseline in mental and physical component summary scores were 3.7 and 2.4, respectively. One glecaprevir/pibrentasvir-related serious adverse event was reported; six glecaprevir/pibrentasvir-related adverse events led to discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: Glecaprevir/pibrentasvir was highly effective, well tolerated, and improved quality of life in HCV-infected persons who use drugs and other underserved patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: These multinational post-marketing observational studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03303599.

Consensus Guidelines: Best Practices for Detection, Assessment and Management of Suspected Acute Drug-Induced Liver Injury During Clinical Trials in Adults with Chronic Viral Hepatitis and Adults with Cirrhosis Secondary to Hepatitis B, C and Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis.

With the widespread development of new drugs to treat chronic liver diseases (CLDs), including viral hepatitis and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), more patients are entering trials with abnormal baseline liver tests and with advanced liver injury, including cirrhosis. The current regulatory guidelines addressing the monitoring, diagnosis, and management of suspected drug-induced liver injury (DILI) during clinical trials primarily address individuals entering with normal baseline liver tests. Using the same laboratory criteria cited as signals of potential DILI in studies involving patients with no underlying liver disease and normal baseline liver tests may result in premature and unnecessary cessation of a study drug in a clinical trial population whose abnormal and fluctuating liver tests are actually due to their underlying CLD. This position paper focuses on defining best practices for the detection, monitoring, diagnosis, and management of suspected acute DILI during clinical trials in patients with CLD, including hepatitis C virus (HCV) and hepatitis B virus (HBV), both with and without cirrhosis and NASH with cirrhosis. This is one of several position papers developed by the IQ DILI Initiative, comprising members from 16 pharmaceutical companies in collaboration with DILI experts from academia and regulatory agencies. It is based on an extensive literature review and discussions between industry members and experts from outside industry to achieve consensus regarding the recommendations. Key conclusions and recommendations include (1) the importance of establishing laboratory criteria that signal potential DILI events and that fit the disease indication being studied in the clinical trial based on knowledge of the natural history of test fluctuations in that disease; (2) establishing a pretreatment value that is based on more than one screening determination, and revising that baseline during the trial if a new nadir is achieved during treatment; (3) basing rules for increased monitoring and for stopping drug for potential DILI on multiples of baseline liver test values and/or a threshold value rather than multiples of the upper limit of normal (ULN) for that test; (4) making use of more sensitive tests of liver function, including direct bilirubin (DB) or combined parameters such as aspartate transaminase:alanine transaminase (AST:ALT) ratio or model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) to signal potential DILI, especially in studies of patients with cirrhosis; and (5) being aware of potential confounders related to complications of the disease being studied that may masquerade as DILI events.

Lemierre-like syndrome caused by community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus complicated by hemorrhagic pericarditis.

OBJECTIVE: To describe an infant with Lemierre-like syndrome caused by community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus whose course was complicated by hemorrhagic pericarditis. DESIGN: Case report. SETTING: A 30-bed, pediatric intensive care unit at a tertiary care children's hospital. PATIENT: A 7-month-old infant presented with fever and torticollis attributable to a retropharyngeal abscess and left internal jugular venous thrombosis. He was treated with antibiotics and anticoagulation, and his course was complicated by hemorrhagic pericarditis and cardiac tamponade. INTERVENTIONS: Resuscitation of shock; video-assisted thoracoscopic drainage of bilateral empyema with pleural decortication; vancomycin and clindamycin treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus; incision and drainage of retropharyngeal abscess; treatment of internal jugular venous thrombus with anticoagulation; and treatment of pericardial tamponade by insertion of pericardial drain. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus from blood and pleural fluid peel cultures were multi-locus sequence type 8, Panton-Valentine leukocidin-positive, and contained SCCmec IV, findings consistent with USA300 pulsotype. There was complete recovery from this life-threatening infection. CONCLUSIONS: Septic jugular venous thrombophlebitis complicating upper airway infections is a rare but serious acute medical condition. We present an infant with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection and clinical features that overlapped those described by Lemierre, in whom hemorrhagic pericarditis developed while receiving anticoagulation therapy. Anticoagulation, if used, should be closely monitored in this population.

Consensus guidelines: best practices for detection, assessment and management of suspected acute drug-induced liver injury occurring during clinical trials in adults with chronic cholestatic liver disease.

BACKGROUND: Improved knowledge of the molecular pathophysiology and immunopathogenesis of cholestatic liver diseases in recent years has led to an increased interest in developing novel therapies. Patients with cholestatic liver disease often require different approaches to assessment and management of suspected drug-induced liver injury (DILI) compared to those with healthy livers and those with parenchymal liver diseases. At present, there are no regulatory guidelines or society position papers, that systematically address best practices pertaining to detection of DILI in these patients. AIMS: To outline best practices for detection, assessment and management of suspected acute DILI during clinical trials in adults with the cholestatic liver diseases - Primary Biliary Cholangitis (PBC) and Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis (PSC). METHODS: This is one of the several papers developed by the IQ DILI Initiative, which is comprised of members from 16 pharmaceutical companies, in collaboration with DILI experts from academia and regulatory agencies. The contents are the result of an extensive literature review, as well as in-depth discussions among industry, regulatory and academic DILI experts, to achieve consensus recommendations on DILI-related issues occurring during clinical trials for cholestatic liver diseases. RESULTS: Recommended best practices are outlined pertaining to hepatic eligibility criteria, monitoring of liver tests, approach to a suspected DILI signal, and hepatic discontinuation rules. CONCLUSIONS: This paper provides a framework for the approach to detection, assessment and management of suspected acute DILI occurring during clinical trials in adults with cholestatic liver disease.

Next-Generation DILI Biomarkers: Prioritization of Biomarkers for Qualification and Best Practices for Biospecimen Collection in Drug Development.

The diagnosis and management of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) remains a challenge in clinical trials in drug development. The qualification of emerging biomarkers capable of predicting DILI soon after the initiation of treatment, differentiating DILI from underlying liver disease, identifying the causal entity, and assigning appropriate treatment options after DILI is diagnosed are needed. Qualification efforts have been hindered by lack of properly stored and consented biospecimens that are linked to clinical data relevant to a specific context of use. Recommendations are made for biospecimen collection procedures, with the focus on clinical trials, and for specific emerging biomarkers to focus qualification efforts.

Consensus: guidelines: best practices for detection, assessment and management of suspected acute drug-induced liver injury during clinical trials in patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis.

BACKGROUND: The last decade has seen a rapid growth in the number of clinical trials enrolling patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). Due to the underlying chronic liver disease, patients with NASH often require different approaches to the assessment and management of suspected drug-induced liver injury (DILI) compared to patients with healthy livers. However, currently no regulatory guidelines or position papers systematically address best practices pertaining to DILI in NASH clinical trials. AIMS: This publication focuses on best practices concerning the detection, monitoring, diagnosis and management of suspected acute DILI during clinical trials in patients with NASH. METHODS: This is one of several papers developed by the IQ DILI Initiative, comprised of members from 15 pharmaceutical companies, in collaboration with DILI experts from academia and regulatory agencies. This paper is based on extensive literature review, and discussions between industry members with expertise in drug safety and DILI experts from outside industry to achieve consensus on common questions related to this topic. RESULTS: Recommended best practices are outlined pertaining to hepatic inclusion and exclusion criteria, monitoring of liver tests, DILI detection, approach to a suspected DILI signal, causality assessment and hepatic discontinuation rules. CONCLUSIONS: This paper provides a framework for the approach to assessment and management of suspected acute DILI during clinical trials in patients with NASH.

Severe eczema vaccinatum in a household contact of a smallpox vaccinee.

BACKGROUND: We report the first confirmed case of eczema vaccinatum in the United States related to smallpox vaccination since routine vaccination was discontinued in 1972. A 28-month-old child with refractory atopic dermatitis developed eczema vaccinatum after exposure to his father, a member of the US military who had recently received smallpox vaccine. The father had a history of inactive eczema but reportedly reacted normally to the vaccine. The child's mother also developed contact vaccinia infection. METHODS: Treatment of the child included vaccinia immune globulin administered intravenously, used for the first time in a pediatric patient; cidofovir, never previously used for human vaccinia infection; and ST-246, an investigational agent being studied for the treatment of orthopoxvirus infection. Serological response to vaccinia virus and viral DNA levels, correlated with clinical events, were utilized to monitor the course of disease and to guide therapy. Burn patient-type management was required, including skin grafts. RESULTS: The child was discharged from the hospital after 48 days and has recovered with no apparent systemic sequelae or significant scarring. CONCLUSION: This case illustrates the need for careful screening prior to administration of smallpox vaccine and awareness by clinicians of the ongoing vaccination program and the potential risk for severe adverse events related to vaccinia virus.

Evaluation of the Pharmacokinetics and Safety of a Single Oral Dose of Fasiglifam in Subjects with Mild or Moderate Hepatic Impairment.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Fasiglifam, a potent, selective novel agonist of G protein-coupled receptor 40, stimulates insulin secretion at elevated blood glucose levels in a glucose-dependent manner. This study evaluated the potential effect of hepatic impairment on the pharmacokinetics and safety of a single dose of fasiglifam and its metabolite M-I. Fasiglifam's clinical development was halted due to liver safety concerns. METHODS: In this phase I, open-label study, subjects with mild or moderate hepatic impairment, along with matched controls (gender, weight, age, and smoking status), received a single, 25-mg oral dose of fasiglifam. Blood samples were collected through 336 h post-dose for pharmacokinetic evaluation. RESULTS: Overall, 73% of subjects were male with a mean age of 54 years. Compared with normal hepatic function subjects (n = 14), mean systemic fasiglifam exposure (Cmax and AUC∞) was reduced in mild (n = 8) and moderate (n = 8) hepatic impairment subjects by approximately 20-40%. However, the observed percent unbound drug plasma concentration appeared comparable across all groups. Mean oral clearance was higher and terminal half-life lower in subjects with mild or moderate hepatic impairment compared with normal hepatic function subjects. Fasiglifam M-I systemic exposure increased by approximately twofold in subjects with mild or moderate hepatic impairment compared with those with normal hepatic function. Fasiglifam was well tolerated, and there were no reports of hypoglycemia. CONCLUSION: Hepatic status did not significantly impact systemic exposure of fasiglifam in this study, in fact, a decrease was observed, suggesting no dose reduction would be required for patients with hepatic impairment.

Correction to: Liver Safety of Fasiglifam (TAK-875) in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: Review of the Global Clinical Trial Experience.

In the original publication of the article, the ALT and AST values in Fig. 5a-e were capped at 10× ULN, which did not accurately reflect the narrative provided for each case. In this correction, the original Fig. 5a-e (Fig. 1a-e) and the correct Fig. 5a-5e (Fig. 2a-e) are published.