Efficacy and safety in patients with haemophilia A switching to octocog alfa (BAY 81-8973): Final results of the global real-world study, TAURUS.

OBJECTIVES: To report the final results of the 2-year TAURUS study, assessing weekly prophylaxis dosing regimens of octocog alfa (Kovaltry®/BAY 81-8973) used in standard clinical practice in patients with moderate-to-severe haemophilia A. METHODS: TAURUS (NCT02830477) is a phase 4, multinational, prospective, non-interventional, single-arm study in patients of any age with moderate or severe haemophilia A (≤5% factor [F]VIII activity). TAURUS was designed to primarily investigate weekly prophylaxis dosing regimens used in standard clinical practice. Annualised bleeding rates (ABRs), treatment satisfaction and adherence, and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: Of 302 patients included in the full analysis set, 84.4% (n = 255) maintained their octocog alfa prophylaxis baseline regimen throughout the study, with a majority of patients (76.5%, n = 231) on two times or three times weekly regimens at the end of the observation period (≥1-≤2 years). ABRs, treatment satisfaction, and adherence remained stable during the observation period. Octocog alfa was well tolerated and there were no new or unexpected adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: These data show that a smooth transition is observed when switching to octocog alfa from a previous FVIII treatment, with no safety issues and stable bleeding rates in a real-world setting of patients with moderate-to-severe haemophilia A.

Real-world evidence on Kovaltry (81-8973) in children with moderate or severe hemophilia A in Europe: a nested cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Untreated hemophilia A patients may experience recurrent bleeding events leading to debilitating joint damages. While RCT and pharmacokinetic data support the value of Kovaltry [an unmodified full-length recombinant factor VIII (FVIII) product], real world evidence in children is lacking. This report describes a descriptive and multivariate analysis of the effectiveness of Kovaltry in children with hemophilia A in the real-world setting, using data from medical chart abstraction and cross-sectional surveys of physicians, patients, and caregivers. RESULTS: Male patients aged < 18 years with moderate or severe hemophilia A, residing in five European countries and treated with FVIII were studied. The co-primary endpoints were the annualized bleeding rate (ABR) and the annual FVIII utilization rate. Twenty nine patients treated with Kovaltry were included, of whom 93% had severe disease and 75% were on continuous prophylactic treatment. The mean ABR was 2.66 ± 2.06, with rates decreasing with age. The children received on average 2.45 infusions per week, consistent across age groups (median 3; range 1-3). There were no reports of inhibitor development or adverse events in the study (AEs), and all patients were satisfied or very satisfied with the treatment. An exploratory multivariate analysis suggests no significant difference in ABR or units utilized between Kovaltry and some extended half life products in children with severe hemophilia A, though characteristics of these patient cohorts were markedly different. CONCLUSION: This analysis demonstrates the effectiveness and safety of Kovaltry in a pan-European pediatric population with severe hemophilia A.

Efficacy, safety, tolerability and population pharmacokinetics of tedizolid, a novel antibiotic, in Latino patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections

Abstract Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections are caused mainly by Gram-positive bacteria which are often treated with intravenous vancomycin, daptomycin, or linezolid, with potential step down to oral linezolid for outpatients. Tedizolid phosphate 200 mg once daily treatment for six days demonstrated non-inferior efficacy, with a favourable safety profile, compared with linezolid 600 mg twice daily treatment for 10 days in the Phase 3 ESTABLISH-1 and -2 trials. The objective of the current post-hoc analysis of the integrated dataset of ESTABLISH-1 and -2 was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tedizolid (N = 182) vs linezolid (N = 171) in patients of Latino origin enrolled into these trials. The baseline demographic characteristics of Latino patients were similar between the two treatment groups. Tedizolid demonstrated comparable efficacy to linezolid at 48–72 h in the intent-to-treat population (tedizolid: 80.2% vs linezolid: 81.9%). Sustained clinical success rates were comparable between tedizolid- and linezolid-treated Latino patients at end-of-therapy (tedizolid: 86.8% vs linezolid: 88.9%). Tedizolid phosphate treatment was well tolerated by Latino patients in the safety population with lower abnormal platelet counts at end-of-therapy (tedizolid: 3.4% vs linezolid: 11.3%, p = 0.0120) and lower incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events (tedizolid: 16.5% vs linezolid: 23.5%). Population pharmacokinetic analysis suggested that estimated tedizolid exposure measures in Latino patients vs non-Latino patients were similar. These findings demonstrate that tedizolid phosphate 200 mg, once daily treatment for six days was efficacious and well tolerated by patients of Latino origin, without warranting dose adjustment.

Efficacy, safety, tolerability and population pharmacokinetics of tedizolid, a novel antibiotic, in Latino patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections.

Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections are caused mainly by Gram-positive bacteria which are often treated with intravenous vancomycin, daptomycin, or linezolid, with potential step down to oral linezolid for outpatients. Tedizolid phosphate 200mg once daily treatment for six days demonstrated non-inferior efficacy, with a favourable safety profile, compared with linezolid 600mg twice daily treatment for 10 days in the Phase 3 ESTABLISH-1 and -2 trials. The objective of the current post-hoc analysis of the integrated dataset of ESTABLISH-1 and -2 was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tedizolid (N=182) vs linezolid (N=171) in patients of Latino origin enrolled into these trials. The baseline demographic characteristics of Latino patients were similar between the two treatment groups. Tedizolid demonstrated comparable efficacy to linezolid at 48-72h in the intent-to-treat population (tedizolid: 80.2% vs linezolid: 81.9%). Sustained clinical success rates were comparable between tedizolid- and linezolid-treated Latino patients at end-of-therapy (tedizolid: 86.8% vs linezolid: 88.9%). Tedizolid phosphate treatment was well tolerated by Latino patients in the safety population with lower abnormal platelet counts at end-of-therapy (tedizolid: 3.4% vs linezolid: 11.3%, p=0.0120) and lower incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events (tedizolid: 16.5% vs linezolid: 23.5%). Population pharmacokinetic analysis suggested that estimated tedizolid exposure measures in Latino patients vs non-Latino patients were similar. These findings demonstrate that tedizolid phosphate 200mg, once daily treatment for six days was efficacious and well tolerated by patients of Latino origin, without warranting dose adjustment.

Comparación entre paclitaxel y MVAC en el tratamiento del cáncer de urotelio. Metaanálisis / Comparison between paclitaxel and MVAC in therapy of urothelium cancer. A meta-analysis

En su estadio clínico avanzado, el carcinoma urotelial ofrece una expectativa de vida muy baja. Durante los últimos 10 años, la terapia sistémica más utilizada consistió en el esquema MVAC, con índices de respuesta entre 56 y 72 por ciento y respuesta completa de 27 por ciento. El paclitaxel es el agente único que ofrece la mayor actividad en esta neoplasia, 42 por ciento. Para la presente revisión se analizaron los estudios durante el periodo comprendido entre 1990 y 1996, con paclitaxel como fármaco único y en combinación con carboplatino y cisplatino y, los informes sobre la combinación de metotrexato, vinblastina, doxorrubicina y cicplatino (MVAC). Comparativamente, es similar la respuesta que se obtiene con paclitaxel, 53.5 por ciento, y MVAC, 51.7 por ciento. En ambos tratamientos la toxicidad resultó semejante, pero con paclitaxel se observaron grados mayores de leucopenia (74 por ciento) y anemia (18 por ciento). En el caso de pacientes con lesión renal el agente indicado es el texano.