Real-world evidence of sorafenib for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: A single-center study.

Context: Hepatocellular carcinoma is the third leading cause of cancer death. Currently, sorafenib is the treatment of choice in advanced hepatocarcinoma. Aims: Assessing the effectiveness and toxicity of sorafenib in real-word clinical practice in patients with hepatocarcinoma. Settings and Design: Single-centered observational retrospective study. Methods and Material: We included patients with hepatocarcinoma who began treatment with sorafenib between 2008 and 2018. We evaluated overall survival, time to progression, and response using RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) criteria. Toxicity was assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5. 2020. Statistical Analysis Used: Kaplan-Meier curves and the log-rank test were used to determine the survival time and estimate factors associated with these events. Data were analyzed with SPSS 19.0 software. Results: We included 36 patients (88.9% male) with an average age of 64 ± 3.4 years. The tumor stage was advanced (C) in 21 patients (61.8%). We obtained a median overall survival of 8.5 months (IQR 3.14-18.9) and a time to progression of 4.5 months (IQR 2.4-8.8). The main degree of response was progression in 19 patients (36.1%), followed by stable disease in 13 (52.8%). The most commonly reported adverse reactions were: constitutional (83.3%), gastrointestinal (55%) and dermatological symptoms (50.0%). The development of grades 3 or 4 toxicity was not associated with increased overall survival (P = 0.719). Conclusions: The findings of the survival analysis obtained in real practice are similar to those obtained in pivotal clinical trials. Adverse reactions were different from those expected.

Regorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil in real clinical practice.

Background: Colorectal cancer is the ninth leading cause of death in Spain. The latest therapeutic developments in the advanced stages of this disease are the oral drugs trifluridine/tipiracil and regorafenib. Objective: Results of clinical trials (CTs) are not in real conditions and therefore, we want to study the effectiveness and the safety profile in the usual clinical practice and compare it with the bibliography. Materials and Methods: A retrospective and unicentric study was carried out in a health area of 500,000 inhabitants. Patients who started treatment with regorafenib and/or trifluridine/tipiracil were included from the date of marketing until June 2019. Patient-related variables, pathology, effectiveness, and treatment toxicity were collected. The statistical analysis was carried out with the PSPP program. Results: Fifty-four patients were analyzed. Men accounted for 59.3% of patients. Regorafenib was the treatment for 22.2% of patients and 77.8% received trifluridine/tipiracil. The reason for the drug's suspension was the disease progression in 85.2% of patients. No patient had a full response and 3.2% achieved partial response. The median progression-free survival time in treatments with regorafenib was 2.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.0-5.4) and the overall survival time was 3.1 months (95% CI: 0.0-6.7), while in treatments with trifluridine/tipiracil, these data were, respectively, 2.8 (95% CI: 2.5-3.2) and 5.7 months (95% CI: 3.8-7.6). Side effects occurred in 91.7% of patients treated with regorafenib and in 100% of treated with trifluridine/tipiracil. Hematological adverse reactions were, on average, 0.4 ± 0.5/patient with regorafenib and 1.5 ± 0.9 with trifluridine/tipiracil. General (77.8%) and gastrointestinal disorders (50%) were common with both drugs. Conclusions: The effectiveness results of standard clinical practice are lower than those described in CTs and in the literature. The toxicity profile does reproduce what is described in the bibliography.

Switching between reference adalimumab and biosimilars in chronic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases: A systematic literature review.

AIMS: Adalimumab is a biological therapy used to treat different chronic inflammatory diseases. At present, there is an increasing number of adalimumab biosimilars. To assume the acceptability of interchangeability between reference adalimumab and biosimilars, there should be evidence about efficacy and safety of this switching. Regulation of this practice falls under the authority of individual European Union Member States. The aim of this study is to systematically review the evidence on the efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of switching between reference adalimumab and biosimilars in different chronic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. METHODS: Studies presenting data about switching between reference adalimumab and biosimilars were identified by sensitive search strategies in Medline and EMBASE from 1 January 2004 to 30 June 2021. RESULTS: A total of 471 references were obtained and 21 finally included in the analysis (total number of patients switching: 2802). Eight different adalimumab biosimilars were tested after receiving reference adalimumab. Eight articles included rheumatoid arthritis (RA), one miscellaneous rheumatic disease, six psoriasis (PSO) and six inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. Overall, the efficacy results in the switching groups were comparable to those obtained in the arms of continuous biosimilar and continuous reference adalimumab. There were no significant differences in treatment emergent adverse events, anti-drug or neutralising antibodies among the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: Switching between reference adalimumab and biosimilars has no impact on efficacy, safety and immunogenicity in patients with RA, PSO and IBD. This finding was consistent for the different adalimumab biosimilars analysed. These conclusions could probably be extended to other rheumatic diseases such as psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis.

Stability of lipid emulsion in total parenteral nutrition: An overview of literature.

BACKGOUND AND AIMS: Total parenteral nutrition (TPN) is an extremely complex mixture. The multitude of chemical compounds involved can give rise to numerous reactions that condition its stability. We set out to review the existing literature on different issues related to stability, and which are still of concern in the hospital environment; such as the stability of the lipid emulsion. In addition, we analyse other related factors and parameters that allow us to predict the stability of TPN based on the composition. MATERIAL AND METHODS: we searched PubMed and Google Scholar, over the date range 1995-2019 for relevant studies about TPN stability. We included experimental studies where the physical stability of the lipid emulsion in TPN had been analysed. We applied specific exclusion criteria. RESULTS: we included 20 papers in this review of TPN stability. The studies combined different analytical techniques to assess the stability. In all the studies, the mean droplet diameter (MDD) is measured and the stability analysis is completed with other measurements. Temperature and components concentration are also considered. CONCLUSIONS: studies on the stability of TPN used differing components with different chemical characteristics and their results can be difficult to extrapolate. There is no clear consensus about the composition of the mixtures and there is also great variety in the analytical techniques that were used to analyse stability. It is necessary to conduct new studies to update information on TPN stability.

Effectiveness, Safety, and Adherence to Treatment of Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin/Kexin Type 9 Inhibitors in Real Practice.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness, adverse reactions, and adherence to treatment of hypolipidemic inhibitors of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9is) in a context of real clinical practice. METHODS: We present an observational, retrospective, descriptive, multicenter study of patients with hypercholesterolemia who began treatment with PCSK9is between January 2017 and December 2019, with a minimum treatment period of 3 months. The main variable we recorded was the frequency of cardiovascular events (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, and hospitalization for unstable angina) in patients treated with PCSK9is. We recorded patient demographic characteristics and cardiovascular risk factors at onset of treatment as well as LDL-C levels and their reductions at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. We calculated adherence to treatment and recorded the adverse reactions during treatment. FINDINGS: A total of 154 patients were studied, 64 (41.6%) of whom were treated with alirocumab and 90 (58.4%) with evolocumab. The initial dose of alirocumab was 75 mg every 14 days in 48 patients (75%) and 150 mg eery 14 days in 16 (25%). All patients who in the evolocumab group received a dose of 140 mg every 14 days. The mean (SD) basal LDL-C level was 159.6 (50.1) mg/dL, the level at 3 months was 87.9 (49.9) mg/dL (mean [SD] decrease, 44.5% [28.2%]), the level at 6 months was 86.7 (49.2) mg/dL (mean [SD] decrease, 46.3% [25.6%]), and the level at 12 months was 80.5 (41.4) (mean [SD] decrease, 48.9% [23.0%]). These values were maintained at 24 months (mean [SD], 80.3 [41.8] mg/dL; mean [SD] decrease, 47.9% [27.8%]). The percentage decrease of LDL-C for both drugs was approximately 50%, which was maintained until 24 months after treatment. Six patients (3.9%) presented with some cardiovascular event: acute myocardial infarction (2 [1.3%]), stroke (1 [0.65%]), coronary revascularization (1 [0.65%]), and hospitalization for unstable angina (2 [1.3%]). We did not see any adverse reactions related to PCSK9i treatment in 76.5% of patients. In the first 6 months, adherence to treatment with PCSK9is, measured as the possession ratio, was a mean (SD) of 99.4% (3.9%). In the rest of the study period (6-24 months), the mean (SD) adherence to treatment was 99.2% (4.7%). IMPLICATIONS: The frequency of cardiovascular events in patients treated with PCSK9is was low and occurred despite adequate adherence to treatment (100% possession ratio) with PCSK9is and concomitant treatment with other hypolipidemics. The effectiveness of PCSK9is is similar to that referred to in other published studies with PCSK9is, and this was maintained in the long term (24 months) with few adverse events, all of which were mild.

Real-world prevalence and consequences of potential drug-drug interactions in the first-wave COVID-19 treatments.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Initial treatment recommendations of COVID-19 were based on the use of antimicrobial drugs and immunomodulators. Although information on drug interactions was available for other pathologies, there was little evidence in the treatment of COVID-19. The objective of this study was to analyse the potential drug-drug interactions (pDDIs) derived from the medication used in COVID-19 patients in the first pandemic wave and to evaluate the real consequences of such interactions in clinical practice. METHODS: Cohort, retrospective and single-centre study carried out in a third-level hospital. Adult patients, admitted with suspected COVID-19, that received at least one dose of hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, interferon beta 1-b or tocilizumab and with any pDDIs according to "Liverpool Drug Interaction Group" between March and May 2020 were included. The possible consequences of pDDIs at the QTc interval level or any other adverse event according to the patient's medical record were analysed. A descriptive analysis was carried out to assess possible factors that may affect the QTc interval prolongation. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Two hundred and eighteen (62.3%) patients of a total of 350 patients admitted with COVID-19 had at least one pDDI. There were 598 pDDIs. Thirty-eight pDDIs (6.3%) were categorized as not recommended or contraindicated. The mean value difference between baseline and pDDI posterior ECG was 412.3 ms ± 25.8 ms vs. 426.3 ms ± 26.7 ms; p < 0.001. Seven patients (5.7%) had a clinically significant alteration of QTc. A total of 44 non-cardiological events (7.3%) with a possible connection to a pDDI were detected. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: The number of pDDIs in patients admitted for COVID-19 in the first pandemic wave was remarkably high. However, clinical consequences occurred in a low percentage of patients. Interactions involving medications that would be contraindicated for concomitant administration are rare. Knowledge of these pDDIs and their consequences could help to establish appropriate therapeutic strategies in patients with COVID-19 or other diseases with these treatments.