Susceptibility of Neisseria gonorrhoeae against a dual treatment antibiotics regimen in primary health centres in Surabaya, Indonesia.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There were 82.4 million new gonorrhoea cases worldwide in 2020. Dual treatment with ceftriaxone or cefixime and azithromycin or doxycycline is currently recommended for gonorrhoea in Indonesia. However, reduced susceptibility and resistance to cephalosporins and azithromycin are increasing. We evaluated the susceptibility pattern of Neisseria gonorrhoeae to cefixime, ceftriaxone, azithromycin and doxycycline. METHOD: N. gonorrhoeae isolates were obtained from 19 male participants with clinically and laboratory-confirmed gonorrhoea. Antibiotic susceptibility testing was conducted by disc diffusion and interpreted according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria. RESULTS: Reduced susceptibility or resistance was observed against doxycycline in 19 isolates (100%), cefixime in six (31.6%), ceftriaxone in three (15.8%) and azithromycin in zero (0%) isolates. DISCUSSION: A dual treatment regimen with ceftriaxone and azithromycin can still be recommended as first-line therapy for gonorrhoea in Indonesia. Antibiotic susceptibility surveillance of N. gonorrhoeae should be routinely conducted.

Integration of individual preclinical and clinical anti-infective PKPD data to predict clinical study outcomes.

The AIDA randomized clinical trial found no significant difference in clinical failure or survival between colistin monotherapy and colistin-meropenem combination therapy in carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative infections. The aim of this reverse translational study was to integrate all individual preclinical and clinical pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PKPD) data from the AIDA trial in a pharmacometric framework to explore whether individualized predictions of bacterial burden were associated with the trial outcomes. The compiled dataset included for each of the 207 patients was (i) information on the infecting Acinetobacter baumannii isolate (minimum inhibitory concentration, checkerboard assay data, and fitness in a murine model), (ii) colistin plasma concentrations and colistin and meropenem dosing history, and (iii) disease scores and demographics. The individual information was integrated into PKPD models, and the predicted change in bacterial count at 24 h for each patient, as well as patient characteristics, was correlated with clinical outcomes using logistic regression. The in vivo fitness was the most important factor for change in bacterial count. A model-predicted growth at 24 h of ≥2-log10 (164/207) correlated positively with clinical failure (adjusted odds ratio, aOR = 2.01). The aOR for one unit increase of other significant predictors were 1.24 for SOFA score, 1.19 for Charlson comorbidity index, and 1.01 for age. This study exemplifies how preclinical and clinical anti-infective PKPD data can be integrated through pharmacodynamic modeling and identify patient- and pathogen-specific factors related to clinical outcomes - an approach that may improve understanding of study outcomes.

Back to the drawing board: Overview of the next generation of combination therapy for inflammatory bowel disease.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is entering a potentially new era of combined therapeutics. Triantafillidis et al provide an insightful review of the current state of combination therapy, with a focus on the use of a combined biologic and immunomodulator, as well as emerging data on the future potential of dual-biologic therapy (DBT). While current evidence for DBT is limited, encouraging safety profiles and ongoing trials suggest a brighter future for this approach. The importance of controlled trials should be stressed in establishing new treatment paradigms. Ongoing prospective randomized trials of DBT and perhaps future combinations of biologics and small molecule therapies will hopefully guide the next generation of IBD care.

Intralesional combined digoxin and furosemide versus intralesional 5-flurouracil for the treatment of recalcitrant plantar warts: a prospective, randomized study.

There are many therapeutic modalities for plantar warts, however treating it remains challenging. Intralesional injection of 5-fluorouarcil and combined digoxin and furosemide were observed to be effective and safe, however no comparison study between them was done. Our study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of both therapies in the treatment of plantar warts. 90 adult patients with multiple recalcitrant plantar warts were included in our study. They were randomly allocated to one of three groups; combined digoxin and furosemide, 5-fluorouarcil, or normal saline group. Fortnightly injections were done into all studied warts till complete clearance or up to 5 sessions. Warts were evaluated clinically and dermoscopically. Clinical response was reported in 24 patients (80%) of the combined digoxin and furosemide group with 40% complete response and in 24 patients (80%) of the 5-fluorouarcil group with 33.3% complete response. No statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups concerning efficacy and safety. Intralesional injection of 5-fluorouarcil and combined digoxin and furosemide are nearly equivalent in efficacy and safety for plantar wart treatment. Dermoscopy helps to take the truthful judgment about complete clearance of warts.

In-vitro evaluation of different antimicrobial combinations with and without colistin against carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii clinical isolates.

BACKGROUND: Carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB) infections are one of the most common causes of nosocomial infections and have high mortality rates due to difficulties in treatment. In this study, the in vitro synergistic interactions of the colistin (CT)-meropenem (MEM) combination and patient clinical outcomes were compared in CRAB-infected patients that receive CT-MEM antimicrobial combination therapy. In addition, in vitro synergistic interactions of MEM-ertapenem (ETP), MEM-fosfomycin (FF) and CT-FF antimicrobial combinations were investigated. Finally, the epsilometer (E) test and checkerboard test results were compared and the compatibility of these two tests was evaluated. METHODS: Twenty-one patients were included in the study. Bacterial identification was performed with MALDI-TOF, and antimicrobial susceptibility was assessed with an automated system. Synergy studies were performed using the E test and checkerboard method. RESULTS: For the checkerboard method, the synergy rates for CT-MEM, MEM-FF, MEM-ETP and CT-FF were 100%, 52.3%, 23.8% and 28.5%, respectively. In the E test synergy tests, synergistic effects were detected for two isolates each in the CT-MEM and CT-FF combinations. Microbial eradication was achieved in nine (52.9%) of the 17 patients that received CT-MEM combination therapy. The agreement between the E test and the checkerboard test was 6.5%. CONCLUSIONS: A synergistic effect was found with the checkerboard method for the CT-MEM combination in all isolates in our study, and approximately 70% of the patients benefited from treatment with this combination. In addition, more than half of the isolates showed a synergistic effect for the MEM-FF combination. Combinations of CT-MEM and MEM-FF may be options for the treatment of CRAB infections. However, a comprehensive understanding of the potential of the microorganism to develop resistant mutants under applied exposures, as well as factors that directly affect antimicrobial activity, such as pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, is essential for providing treatment advice. We found a low rate of agreement between the E test method and the checkerboard test method in our study, in contrast to the literature. Comprehensive studies that compare clinical results with methods are needed to determine the ideal synergy test and interpretation method.

Evaluation of Dihydroartemisinin-Piperaquine Efficacy and Molecular Markers in Uncomplicated Falciparum Patients: A Study across Binh Phuoc and Dak Nong, Vietnam.

Background and Objectives: Malaria continues to be a significant global health challenge. The efficacy of artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) has declined in many parts of the Greater Mekong Subregion, including Vietnam, due to the spread of resistant malaria strains. This study was conducted to assess the efficacy of the Dihydroartemisinin (DHA)-Piperaquine (PPQ) regimen in treating uncomplicated falciparum malaria and to conduct molecular surveillance of antimalarial drug resistance in Binh Phuoc and Dak Nong provinces. Materials and Methods: The study included 63 uncomplicated malaria falciparum patients from therapeutic efficacy studies (TES) treated following the WHO treatment guidelines (2009). Molecular marker analysis was performed on all 63 patients. Methods encompassed Sanger sequencing for pfK13 mutations and quantitative real-time PCR for the pfpm2 gene. Results: This study found a marked decrease in the efficacy of the DHA-PPQ regimen, with an increased rate of treatment failures at two study sites. Genetic analysis revealed a significant presence of pfK13 mutations and pfpm2 amplifications, indicating emerging resistance to artemisinin and its partner drug. Conclusions: The effectiveness of the standard DHA-PPQ regimen has sharply declined, with rising treatment failure rates. This decline necessitates a review and possible revision of national malaria treatment guidelines. Importantly, molecular monitoring and clinical efficacy assessments together provide a robust framework for understanding and addressing detection drug resistance in malaria.

Efficacy and Safety of Vildagliptin and Remogliflozin as Add-on Therapy to Metformin in Patients of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: An open-label comparative study.

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of remogliflozin compared to vildagliptin as an add-on drug to metformin in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treatment. Metformin is considered a first-line drug in T2DM. However, as the disease progresses with heightened insulin resistance and declining ß-cell function, the use of metformin alone is often inadequate to achieve optimum glucose levels. Methods: This prospective, randomised study was conducted at Maulana Azad Medical College and Associated Hospital in New Delhi, India, between February 2020 to January 2021. This study recruited 60 T2DM patients aged 35-70 years with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) >6.5% taking metformin at a daily dosage of 1,500-3,000 mg for ≥3 months. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either vildagliptin (50 mg) or remogliflozin (100 mg) twice daily for 90 days. The primary endpoint was a change in HbA1c levels from baseline to the end of 90 days whereas secondary endpoints were changes in lipid profile and weight. Results: The decrement in mean HbA1c levels was significantly higher in the remogliflozin group than in the vildagliptin group (-8.1% versus -2.4%; P <0.001). In addition, more significant weight loss was found in remogliflozin-treated patients (-5.2% versus -0.6%; P <0.01). Both treatments were well tolerated throughout the study. Conclusion: Compared to vildagliptin, remoglilflozin was significantly more effective in glycaemic control and weight loss in patients with T2DM and can therefore be considered as an add-on drug in T2DM not adequately controlled by metformin monotherapy.

A randomized controlled double-blinded split-face prospective clinical trial to assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a novel 3-step routine compared to benzoyl peroxide for the treatment of mild to moderate acne vulgaris.

Adult acne vulgaris affects up to 43-51% of individuals. While there are numerous treatment options for acne including topical, oral, and energy-based approaches, benzoyl peroxide (BPO) is a popular over the counter (OTC) treatment. Although BPO monotherapy has a long history of efficacy and safety, it suffers from several disadvantages, most notably, skin irritation, particularly for treatment naïve patients. In this prospective, randomized, controlled, split-face study, we evaluated the comparative efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a novel 3-step azelaic acid, salicylic acid, and graduated retinol regimen versus a common OTC BPO-based regimen over 12 weeks. A total of 37 adult subjects with self-reported mild to moderate acne vulgaris were recruited. A total of 21 subjects underwent a 2-week washout period and completed the full study with 3 dropping out due to product irritation from the BPO routine, and 13 being lost to follow-up. Detailed tolerability surveys were conducted at Week 4. Additional surveys on tolerability and product preferences were collected monthly, at Week 4, Week 8, and Week 12. A blinded board-certified dermatologist objectively scored the presence and type of acne lesions (open or closed comedones, papules, pustules, nodules, and cysts) at baseline, Week 4, Week 8, and Week 12. Patients photographed themselves and uploaded the images using personal mobile phones. Detailed Week 4 survey results showed across 25 domains of user-assessed product performance, the novel routine outperformed the BPO routine in 19 (76%) which included domains in preference (e.g. "I would use this in the future) and performance ("my skin improved" and "helped my acne clear up faster"). Users of the novel routine reported less facial redness, itching, and burning, though differences did not reach statistical significance. In terms of efficacy, both products performed similarly, reducing total acne lesions by 36% (novel routine) and 40% (BPO routine) by Week 12. Overall, accounting for user preferences and tolerability the novel routine was more preferred than the BPO routine in 79% of domains (22/28). Differences in objective acne lesion reduction were not statistically significant (p = 0.97). In a randomized split-face study, a 3-step azelaic acid, salicylic acid, and graduated retinol regimen delivered similar acne lesion reduction, fewer user dropouts, greater user tolerability, and higher use preference compared to a 3-step BPO routine based in a cohort of participants with mild-to-moderate acne vulgaris.

Long-term effects of adjunctive eslicarbazepine acetate in adult Asian patients with refractory focal seizures: Post hoc analysis of a phase III trial.

A post hoc analysis of data from Asian patients included in the study BIA-2093-304 was conducted to evaluate the long-term safety/tolerability and efficacy of adjunctive eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) in adult Asian patients with refractory focal seizures. Part I was a randomized controlled trial, in which patients received ESL (800 or 1200 mg once daily [QD]) or placebo, assessed over a 12-week maintenance period. Patients completing Part I could enter two open-label extension periods (Part II, 1 year; Part III, ≥2 years), during which all received ESL (400-1600 mg QD). Safety/tolerability was assessed by evaluating treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Efficacy assessments included responder and seizure freedom rates. The safety population included 125, 92, and 23 Asian patients in Parts I, II, and III, respectively. Incidence of ESL-related TEAEs was 61.3%, 45.7%, and 17.4% during Parts I, II, and III, respectively. ESL-related TEAEs (most commonly, dizziness, somnolence, and headache) were consistent with ESL's known safety profile. During Part I, responder rates were higher with ESL 800 (41.7%) and 1200 mg QD (44.4%) versus placebo (32.6%), although not statistically significant. Seizure freedom rates with ESL 800 (5.5%) and 1200 mg QD (11.1%) were also higher versus placebo (0%) (p < 0.05 for ESL 1200 mg QD versus placebo). At the end of Part II, responder and seizure freedom rates were 60.3% and 14.7%, respectively. In summary, adult Asian patients with refractory focal seizures were responsive to treatment with ESL as adjunctive therapy and generally showed treatment tolerance well for up to 3 years. No new/unexpected safety findings were observed.

Minocycline in the eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Difficulty in obtaining tetracycline, increased adverse reactions, and relatively complicated medication methods have limited the clinical application of the classic bismuth quadruple therapy. Therefore, the search for new alternative drugs has become one of the research hotspots. In recent years, minocycline, as a semisynthetic tetracycline, has demonstrated good potential for eradicating Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection, but the systematic evaluation of its role remains lacking. AIM: To explore the efficacy, safety, and compliance of minocycline in eradicating H. pylori infection. METHODS: We comprehensively retrieved the electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, SinoMed, and Wanfang database as of October 30, 2023, and finally included 22 research reports on H. pylori eradication with minocycline-containing regimens as per the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The eradication rates of H. pylori were calculated using a fixed or a random effect model, and the heterogeneity and publication bias of the studies were measured. RESULTS: The single-arm meta-analysis revealed that the minocycline-containing regimens achieved good overall H. pylori eradication rates, reaching 82.3% [95% confidence interval (CI): 79.7%-85.1%] in the intention-to-treat analysis and 90.0% (95%CI: 87.7%-92.4%) in the per-protocol analysis. The overall safety and compliance of the minocycline-containing regimens were good, demonstrating an overall incidence of adverse reactions of 36.5% (95%CI: 31.5%-42.2%). Further by traditional meta-analysis, the results showed that the minocycline-containing regimens were not statistically different from other commonly used eradication regimens in eradication rate and incidence of adverse effects. Most of the adverse reactions were mild to moderate and well-tolerated, and dizziness was relatively prominent in the minocycline-containing regimens (16%). CONCLUSION: The minocycline-containing regimens demonstrated good efficacy, safety, and compliance in H. pylori eradication. Minocycline has good potential to replace tetracycline for eradicating H. pylori infection.

Biogated mesoporous silica nanoagents for inhibition of cell migration and combined cancer therapy.

Migration is an initial step in tumor expansion and metastasis; suppressing cellular migration is beneficial to cancer therapy. Herein, we designed a novel biogated nanoagents that integrated the migration inhibitory factor into the mesoporous silica nanoparticle (MSN) drug delivery nanosystem to realize cell migratory inhibition and synergistic treatment. Antisense oligonucleotides (Anti) of microRNA-330-3p, which is positively related with cancer cell proliferation, migration, invasion, and angiogenesis, not only acted as the locker for blocking drugs but also acted as the inhibitory factor for suppressing migration via gene therapy. Synergistic with gene therapy, the biogated nanoagents (termed as MSNs-Gef-Anti) could achieve on-demand drug release based on the intracellular stimulus-recognition and effectively kill tumor cells. Experimental results synchronously demonstrated that the migration suppression ability of MSNs-Gef-Anti nanoagents (nearly 30%) significantly contributed to cancer therapy, and the lethality rate of the non-small-cell lung cancer was up to 70%. This strategy opens avenues for realizing efficacious cancer therapy and should provide an innovative way for pursuing the rational design of advanced nano-therapeutic platforms with the combination of cancer cell migratory inhibition.

Efficacy and safety of nemolizumab and topical corticosteroids for prurigo nodularis: results from a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled phase II/III clinical study in patients aged ≥ 13†years.

BACKGROUND: Prurigo nodularis (PN), a chronic inflammatory skin condition, adversely affects the quality of life of affected individuals. Current treatment options for PN in Japan are limited. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the optimal dose, efficacy and safety of long-term treatment with nemolizumab in patients with PN in Japan. METHODS: In a 16-week double-blind phase II/III study, patients aged ≥ 13 years with PN were randomly assigned (1 : 1 : 1) to nemolizumab 30-mg, 60-mg or placebo groups, with concomitant topical corticosteroids, every 4 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the percentage change in the weekly mean Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS) score (range 0-10, with higher scores indicating worse itching) from baseline to week 16. Secondary efficacy endpoints assessed the impact of treatment on pruritus, PN severity, sleep and quality of life. RESULTS: At week 16, the least-squares mean percentage change from baseline in the PP-NRS score was -61.1% in the nemolizumab 30-mg group (n = 77), -56.0% in the 60-mg group (n = 76), and -18.6% in the placebo group (n = 76). Differences between both nemolizumab groups and placebo were significant; the difference between the 30-mg and placebo groups was -42.5% [95% confidence interval (CI) -51.9 to -33.1; P < 0.0001], and between the 60-mg and placebo groups was -37.4% (95% CI -46.7 to -28.1; P < 0.0001). Patients treated with nemolizumab also had greater improvements in the number and severity of prurigo nodules, and in sleep and quality of life compared with the placebo group. Both nemolizumab doses were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in PN were greater following nemolizumab treatment, despite continuation of topical corticosteroids in both groups.

Prurigo nodularis (PN) is a skin condition in which firm, raised bumps are seen on the arms, legs and trunk. These bumps are extremely itchy and can cause interruptions to sleep, as well as anxiety and distress. There are few available treatments for PN in Japan; and better options are needed. Nemolizumab is a new treatment which has been shown to reduce itching associated with several skin conditions, including PN. In this study, we investigated whether nemolizumab could reduce itch and nodules and improve quality of life in patients aged 13 years or older in Japan who had already tried topical steroids or antihistamines to treat their PN. We treated 229 patients with PN by injecting either nemolizumab or placebo under the skin every 4 weeks. Seventy-seven patients received a first dose of nemolizumab 60 mg, followed by 30 mg every 4 weeks, and 76 patients received nemolizumab 60 mg at every injection. Another 76 patients received placebo at each injection. All patients were allowed to continue using their topical treatments during the study. We found that both doses of nemolizumab were better than placebo at reducing itch over 16 weeks. After nemolizumab treatment, patients also had less severe PN, better sleep and better quality of life. Both doses of nemolizumab were well tolerated by patients and there were no severe side-effects associated with nemolizumab treatment. Overall, nemolizumab could be a helpful new treatment option for people with PN who do not get enough itch relief with current medication.

Combination treatment of inflammatory bowel disease: Present status and future perspectives.

The treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), especially those with severe or refractory disease, represents an important challenge for the clinical gastroenterologist. It seems to be no exaggeration to say that in these patients, not only the scientific background of the gastroenterologist is tested, but also the abundance of "gifts" that he should possess (insight, intuition, determination, ability to take initiative, etc.) for the successful outcome of the treatment. In daily clinical practice, depending on the severity of the attack, IBD is treated with one or a combination of two or more pharmaceutical agents. These combinations include not only the first-line drugs (e.g., mesalazine, corticosteroids, antibiotics, etc) but also second- and third-line drugs (immunosuppressants and biologic agents). It is a fact that despite the significant therapeutic advances there is still a significant percentage of patients who do not satisfactorily respond to the treatment applied. Therefore, a part of these patients are going to surgery. In recent years, several small-size clinical studies, reviews, and case reports have been published combining not only biological agents with other drugs (e.g., immunosuppressants or corticosteroids) but also the combination of two biological agents simultaneously, especially in severe cases. In our opinion, it is at least a strange (and largely unexplained) fact that we often use combinations of drugs in a given patient although studies comparing the simultaneous administration of two or more drugs with monotherapy are very few. As mentioned above, there is a timid tendency in the literature to combine two biological agents in severe cases unresponsive to the applied treatment or patients with severe extraintestinal manifestations. The appropriate dosage, the duration of the administration, the suitable timing for checking the clinical and laboratory outcome, as well as the treatment side-effects, should be the subject of intense clinical research shortly. In this editorial, we attempt to summarize the existing data regarding the already applied combination therapies and to humbly formulate thoughts and suggestions for the future application of the combination treatment of biological agents in a well-defined category of patients. We suggest that the application of biomarkers and artificial intelligence could help in establishing new forms of treatment using the available modern drugs in patients with IBD resistant to treatment.

Furosemide to lower antenatal severe hypertension: a randomized placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy are a leading cause of perinatal morbidity, and timely treatment of severely elevated blood pressure is recommended to prevent serious sequelae. In acute hypertension marked by increased blood volume, it is unknown whether diuretics used as an adjunct to antihypertensive medications lead to more effective blood pressure control. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate whether the addition of intravenous furosemide to first-line antihypertensive agents reduces systolic blood pressure in acute-onset, severe antenatal hypertension with wide (≥60 mm Hg) pulse pressure. STUDY DESIGN: In this double-blinded randomized trial, participants received 40 mg of intravenous furosemide or placebo in addition to a first-line antihypertensive agent. The primary outcome was mean systolic blood pressure during the first hour after intervention. Secondary outcomes included corresponding diastolic blood pressure; systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and pulse pressure at 2 hours after intervention; total reduction from qualifying blood pressure; duration of blood pressure control; need for additional antihypertensive doses within 1 hour; and electrolytes and urine output. A sample size of 35 participants per group was planned to detect a 15-mm Hg difference in blood pressure. RESULTS: Between January 2021 and March 2022, 65 individuals were randomized: 33 to furosemide and 32 to placebo. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. There was no difference in the primary outcome of mean 1-hour systolic blood pressure (147 [14.8] vs 152 [13.8] mm Hg; P=.200). We found a reduction in 2-hour systolic blood pressure (139 [18.5] vs 154 [18.4] mm Hg; P=.007) and a decrease in 2-hour pulse pressure (55 [12.5] vs 67 [15.1]; P=.003) in the furosemide group. Subgroup analysis according to hypertension type showed a significant reduction in 2-hour systolic blood pressure and 2-hour pulse pressure among patients with new-onset hypertension, but not among those with preexisting hypertension. Urine output was greater in the furosemide group, with no difference in electrolytes and creatinine before and after intervention. CONCLUSION: Intravenous furosemide in conjunction with a first-line antihypertensive agent did not significantly reduce systolic blood pressure in the first hour after administration. However, both systolic blood pressure and pulse pressure at 2 hours were decreased in the furosemide group. These findings suggest that a 1-time dose of intravenous furosemide is a reasonable adjunct to achieve blood pressure control, particularly in patients in whom increased volume is suspected.

First-line camrelizumab (a PD-1 inhibitor) plus apatinib (an VEGFR-2 inhibitor) and chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer (SPACE): a phase 1 study.

Patients with advanced gastric cancer typically face a grim prognosis. This phase 1a (dose escalation) and phase 1b (dose expansion) study investigated safety and efficacy of first-line camrelizumab plus apatinib and chemotherapy for advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. The primary endpoints included maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in phase 1a and objective response rate (ORR) across phase 1a and 1b. Phase 1a tested three dose regimens of camrelizumab, apatinib, oxaliplatin, and S-1. Dose regimen 1: camrelizumab 200 mg on day 1, apatinib 250 mg every other day, oxaliplatin 100 mg/m² on day 1, and S-1 40 mg twice a day on days 1-14. Dose regimen 2: same as dose regimen 1, but oxaliplatin 130 mg/m². Dose regimen 3: same as dose regimen 2, but apatinib 250 mg daily. Thirty-four patients were included (9 in phase 1a, 25 in phase 1b). No dose-limiting toxicities occurred so no MTD was identified. Dose 3 was set for the recommended phase 2 doses and administered in phase 1b. The confirmed ORR was 76.5% (95% CI 58.8-89.3). The median progression-free survival was 8.4 months (95% CI 5.9-not evaluable [NE]), and the median overall survival (OS) was not mature (11.6-NE). Ten patients underwent surgery after treatment and the multidisciplinary team evaluation. Among 24 patients without surgery, the median OS was 19.6 months (7.8-NE). Eighteen patients (52.9%) developed grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events. Camrelizumab plus apatinib and chemotherapy showed favorable clinical outcomes and manageable safety for untreated advanced gastric cancer (ChiCTR2000034109).

Combined Dexamethasone and Dexmedetomidine as Adjuncts to Popliteal and Saphenous Nerve Blocks in Patients Undergoing Surgery of the Foot or Ankle: A Randomized, Blinded, Placebo-controlled Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Both dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine increase the duration of analgesia of peripheral nerve blocks. The authors hypothesized that combined intravenous dexamethasone and intravenous dexmedetomidine would result in a greater duration of analgesia when compared with intravenous dexamethasone alone and placebo. METHODS: The authors randomly allocated participants undergoing surgery of the foot or ankle under general anesthesia and with a combined popliteal (sciatic) and saphenous nerve block to a combination of 12 mg dexamethasone and 1 µg/kg dexmedetomidine, 12 mg dexamethasone, or placebo (saline). The primary outcome was the duration of analgesia measured as the time from block performance until the first sensation of pain in the surgical area as reported by the participant. The authors predefined a 33% difference in the duration of analgesia as clinically relevant. RESULTS: A total of 120 participants from two centers were randomized and 119 analyzed for the primary outcome. The median [interquartile range] duration of analgesia was 1,572 min [1,259 to 1,715] with combined dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine, 1,400 min [1,133 to 1,750] with dexamethasone alone, and 870 min [748 to 1,138] with placebo. Compared with placebo, the duration was greater with combined dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine (difference, 564 min; 98.33% CI, 301 to 794; P < 0.001) and with dexamethasone (difference, 489 min; 98.33% CI, 265 to 706; P < 0.001). The prolongations exceeded the authors' predefined clinically relevant difference. The duration was similar when combined dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine was compared with dexamethasone alone (difference, 61 min; 98.33% CI, -222 to 331; P = 0.614). CONCLUSIONS: Dexamethasone with or without dexmedetomidine increased the duration of analgesia in patients undergoing surgery of the foot or ankle with a popliteal (sciatic) and saphenous nerve block. Combined dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine did not increase the duration of analgesia when compared with dexamethasone.

Pharmacodynamic rationale for the choice of antiseizure medications in the paediatric population.

In the landscape of paediatric epilepsy treatment, over 20 anti-seizure medications (ASMs) have gained approval from Drug Regulatory Agencies, each delineating clear indications. However, the complexity of managing drug-resistant epilepsy often necessitates the concurrent use of multiple medications. This therapeutic challenge highlights a notable gap: the absence of standardized guidelines, compelling clinicians to rely on empirical clinical experience when selecting combination therapies. This comprehensive review aims to explore current evidence elucidating the preferential utilization of specific ASMs or their combinations, with a primary emphasis on pharmacodynamic considerations. The fundamental objective underlying rational polytherapy is the strategic combination of medications, harnessing diverse mechanisms of action to optimize efficacy while mitigating shared side effects. Moreover, the intricate interplay between epilepsy and comorbidities partly may influence the treatment selection process. Despite advancements, unresolved queries persist, notably concerning the mechanisms underpinning drug resistance and the paradoxical exacerbation of seizures. By synthesizing existing evidence and addressing pertinent unresolved issues, this review aims to contribute to the evolving landscape of paediatric epilepsy treatment strategies, paving the way for more informed and efficacious therapeutic interventions.

Effectiveness analysis of three-drug combination therapies for refractory focal epilepsy.

Selecting appropriate antiseizure medications (ASMs) for combination therapy in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) is a complex task that requires an empirical approach, especially in patients receiving polytherapy. We aimed to analyze the effectiveness of various three-drug combinations in a group of patients with DRE under real-world conditions. This single-center, longitudinal observational study investigated patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy who received three-drug regimens in the outpatient clinic of Tongji Hospital from September 2019 to December 2022. The effectiveness of each triple regimen was evaluated by the seizure-free rate and within-patient ratio of the seizure frequency (a seizure frequency ratio [SFR]<1 indicated superior efficacy). The independent t-test or Mann-Whitney U test was used for effectiveness analysis, and P values were adjusted by the Benjamini-Hochberg method for multiple comparisons. A total of 511 triple trials comprising 76 different regimens were conducted among 323 enrolled patients. Among these triple regimens, lamotrigine (LTG)/valproic acid (VPA)/topiramate (TPM) was the most frequently prescribed (29.4%, n â€‹= â€‹95). At the last clinical visit, 14.9% (n â€‹= â€‹48) of patients achieved seizure freedom after receiving triple therapy. LTG/VPA/TPM and LTG/VPA/levetiracetam (LEV) exhibited the highest seizure-free rates at 17.9% and 12.8%, respectively. These two regimens also had significantly lower median SFRs of 0.48 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.17-0.85; adjusted P â€‹< â€‹0.001) and 0.63 (IQR, 0.21-1.04; adjusted P â€‹< â€‹0.01), respectively. LTG/VPA/perampanel (PER) was another promising regimen that showed marginal effectiveness (median SFR â€‹= â€‹0.67; adjusted P â€‹= â€‹0.053). LTG/VPA/phenobarbital had the highest incidence of regimen-specific side effects (40.0%, 4/10), while the incidence of side effects from LTG/VPA/LEV was minimal (5.1%, 2/39). In conclusion, LTG/VPA/TPM and LTG/VPA/LEV exhibited superior efficacy and good tolerability in treating patients with DRE. Our results provide preliminary insights into the selection of ASMs for three-drug combination therapies in this clinically challenging population.