Possible adverse events of imidazole antifungal drugs during treatment of vulvovaginal candidiasis: analysis of the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System.

Azole antifungal drugs are commonly used to treat vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC). The nephrotoxicity and developmental toxicity of azole drugs have not been systematically analyzed in the real world. We used the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) to investigate the adverse events (AEs) associated with imidazole therapy for VVC. FAERS data (from quarter 1 2004 to quarter 3 2022) were retrieved using OpenVigil 2.1, and AEs were retrieved and standardized according to the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA). In the top 10 System Organ Class (SOC), all four drugs have been found to have kidney and urinary system diseases and pregnancy. We found significant signals, including clotrimazole [bladder transitional cell carcinoma, (report odds ratio, ROR = 291.66)], [fetal death, (ROR = 10.28)], ketoconazole[nephrogenic anemia (ROR = 22.1)], [premature rupture of membranes (ROR = 22.91 46.45, 11, 3)], Miconazole[hematuria (ROR = 19.03)], [neonatal sepsis (ROR = 123.71)], [spontaneous abortion (ROR = 5.98)], Econazole [acute kidney injury (ROR = 4.41)], [spontaneous abortion (ROR = 19.62)]. We also discovered new adverse reactions that were not reported. Therefore, when using imidazole drugs for treatment, it is necessary to closely monitor the patient's renal function, pay attention to the developmental toxicity of the fetus during pregnancy, and be aware of potential adverse reactions that may occur.

Cucurbit[7]uril-based host-guest complexes for improving bioavailability and reducing side effects of piroxicam.

Piroxicam (PX) is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) commonly associated with gastrointestinal (GI) injuries, including dyspepsia, heartburn, inflammation, bleeding, ulceration, and life-threatening perforation. The ß-cyclodextrin (ß-CD)-based PX formulation (PX@CD) has been shown to reduce gastric side effects by improving PX's solubility and dissolution rates. However, the solubility of PX can only be increased to a limited extent by ß-CD, due to the low binding constant between PX and ß-CD (∼100 M-1). As a result, adverse reactions such as epigastric pain and pyrosis are still commonly reported. Cucurbit[7]uril (CB[7]) is a synthetic macrocyclic host compound that binds strongly to various drugs. In this study, we demonstrated that CB[7] forms complexes with PX in the gastric acid environment with a binding constant approximately 70 times higher than that between ß-CD and PX. The PX@CB[7] inclusion complexes exhibited rapid dissolution rates in the gastric environment. In addition, PX@CB[7] showed significantly higher oral bioavailability and maximum concentration (Cmax) compared to PX and PX@CD (1:2.5), resulting in improved anti-inflammatory effects in both mouse and rat models. Moreover, PX@CB[7] (1:2.5) had the least adhesion to the gastric mucosa and caused the mildest gastric side effects in rat models when compared to PX, PX@CD (1:2.5), and PX@CB[7] (1:1). Lastly, CB[7] demonstrated good oral biocompatibility in a subacute toxicity evaluation study. These findings indicate that CB[7] could be used as an excipient to improve treatment effectiveness and decrease adverse reactions in orally administered formulations with a favorable safety profile.

Not first-line antihypertensive agents, but still effective-The efficacy and safety of imidazoline receptor agonists: A network meta-analysis.

Cardiovascular disorders are the leading cause of death in the world. Many organ diseases (kidney, heart, and brain) are substantially more prone to develop in people with hypertension. In the treatment of hypertension, first-line medications are recommended, while imidazoline receptor agonists are not first-line antihypertensives. Our goal was to conduct a network meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of imidazoline receptor agonists. The meta-analysis was performed following the PRISMA guidelines using the PICOS format, considering the CONSORT recommendations. Studies were collected from four databases: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase. A total of 5960 articles were found. After filtering, 27 studies remained eligible for network meta-analysis. Moxonidine reduced blood pressure in sitting position statistically significantly after 8 weeks of treatment (SBP MD: 23.80; 95% CI: 17.45-30.15; DBP MD: 10.90; 95% CI: 8.45-13.35) compared to placebo. Moreover, moxonidine reduced blood pressure more effectively than enalapril; however, this difference was not significant (SBP MD: 3.10; 95% CI: -2.60-8.80; DBP MD: 1.30; 95% CI: -1.25-3.85). Dry mouth was experienced as a side effect in the case of all imidazoline receptor agonists. After 8 weeks of treatment, the appearance of dry mouth was highest with clonidine (OR: 9.27 95% CI: 4.70-18.29) and lowest with rilmenidine (OR: 6.46 95% CI: 0.85-49.13) compared to placebo. Somnolence was less frequent with moxonidine compared to rilmenidine (OR: 0.63 95% CI: 0.17-2.31). Imidazoline receptor agonists were nearly as effective as the first-line drugs in the examined studies. However, their utility as antihypertensives is limited due to their side effects. As a result, they are not first-line antihypertensives and should not be used in monotherapy. However, in the case of resistant hypertension, they are a viable option. According to our findings, from the point of view of safety and efficacy, moxonidine appears to be the best choice among imidazoline receptor agonists.

Large-vessel vasculitis possibly induced by BRAF and MEK inhibitors for BRAF V600E positive lung adenocarcinoma.

The combination therapy of v-Raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1 (BRAF) and mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase (MEK) inhibitors is approved for treating patients with BRAF V600E-positive tumours, including melanoma and lung cancer. Several case reports indicated autoimmune side effects associated with the use of BRAF and MEK inhibitors. Still, the effects of these drugs on the immune system were not fully elucidated. Here, we report a patient with large-vessel vasculitis diagnosed after initiation of treatment with dabrafenib and trametinib for BRAF V600E-positive metastatic lung adenocarcinoma. She was a never-smoker woman in her early 70s who presented with a chronic cough and was diagnosed with BRAF V600E-positive metastatic lung adenocarcinoma by transbronchial lung biopsy. She was successfully treated with prednisolone and methotrexate while BRAF and MEK inhibitors were continued. We should be careful about autoimmune diseases using BRAF and MEK inhibitors.

Chronic diarrhoea, weight loss and a positive anti-tissue transglutaminase antibody: A case report of olmesartan-induced enteropathy.

Olmesartan is an angiotensin II receptor blocker licensed for the treatment of hypertension. It can cause a sprue-like enteropathy (SLE), characterised by chronic diarrhoea, weight loss and villous atrophy. Transiently raised anti-tissue transglutaminase (ATTG) antibody has also been rarely reported in the literature.We describe the case of a woman in her mid-50s, who presented with a history of intermittent loose stools over 1 year, associated with significant weight loss. She had two marginally raised serum ATTG antibody tests during her work-up.After extensive investigations, she was diagnosed with olmesartan-induced enteropathy. On subsequent follow-up, her symptoms had resolved with cessation of her olmesartan therapy.This case adds to existing literature, highlighting the importance of considering olmesartan as a possible differential diagnosis for SLE. It also reports the presence of a raised ATTG antibody which is infrequently reported in this context.

Efficacy and safety of surufatinib plus toripalimab, a chemotherapy-free regimen, in patients with advanced gastric/gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, or biliary tract cancer.

BACKGROUND: The programmed death 1 inhibitor toripalimab plus the angio-immuno kinase inhibitor surufatinib showed a tolerable safety profile and preliminary efficacy in patients with advanced solid tumors in a phase I study. METHODS: This open-label, multi-cohort study in China enrolled patients with advanced solid tumors who had failed or were intolerable to standard treatment into tumor-specific cohorts. Patients received surufatinib (250 mg orally, once daily) plus toripalimab (240 mg intravenously, once every three weeks). Results for three cohorts (gastric/gastroesophageal junction [GC/GEJ] adenocarcinoma, esophageal squamous cell carcinoma [ESCC], and biliary tract carcinoma [BTC]) are reported here. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per Response Evaluation criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. RESULTS: Between December 17, 2019, and January 29, 2021, 60 patients were enrolled (GC/GEJ, n = 20; ESCC, n = 20; BTC, n = 20). At data cutoff (February 28, 2023), ORRs were 31.6%, 30.0%, and 11.1%, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 4.1, 2.7, and 2.9 months, respectively. Median overall survival was 13.7, 10.4, and 7.0 months, respectively. Overall, grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 28 (46.7%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Surufatinib plus toripalimab showed promising antitumor activity and a tolerable safety profile in immunotherapy-naïve patients with GC/GEJ adenocarcinoma, ESCC, or BTC. These findings warrant further study in larger randomized trials comparing surufatinib plus toripalimab with standard therapies in these tumors. CLINICALTRIALS: gov NCT04169672.

Ponatinib vs Imatinib in Frontline Philadelphia Chromosome-Positive Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: In newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), disease progression due to acquired resistance to first- or second-generation BCR::ABL1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors is common. Ponatinib inhibits BCR::ABL1 and all single-mutation variants, including T315I. Objective: To compare frontline ponatinib vs imatinib in adults with newly diagnosed Ph+ ALL. Design, Setting, and Participants: Global registrational, phase 3, open-label trial in adults aged 18 years or older with newly diagnosed Ph+ ALL. From January 2019 to May 2022, eligible patients at 77 sites were randomized 2:1 to ponatinib (30 mg/d) or imatinib (600 mg/d) with reduced-intensity chemotherapy, followed by single-agent ponatinib or imatinib after the cycle 20 phase of the trial. The last date of follow-up for this analysis was August 12, 2022. Intervention: Patients received ponatinib, 30 mg/d, or imatinib, 600 mg/d, with reduced-intensity chemotherapy, followed by single-agent ponatinib or imatinib after cycle 20. The ponatinib dose was reduced to 15 mg on achievement of minimal residual disease-(MRD) negative complete remission. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point of this interim analysis was MRD-negative complete remission (≤0.01% BCR::ABL1 [MR4] centrally assessed by reverse transcriptase-quantitative polymerase chain reaction), with complete remission maintained for at least 4 weeks at the end of cycle 3. The key secondary end point was event-free survival. Results: Of 245 patients randomized (median age, 54 years; 133 [54.3%] female), 232 (ponatinib, n = 154; imatinib, n = 78) who had p190 or p210 dominant isoforms verified by the central laboratory were analyzed for the primary end point. The MRD-negative complete remission rate (primary end point) was significantly higher with ponatinib (34.4% [53/154]) vs imatinib (16.7% [13/78]) (risk difference, 0.18 [95% CI, 0.06-0.29]; P = .002). At the data cutoff, event-free survival had not met the prespecified number of events. Median event-free survival was not reached in the ponatinib group and was 29 months in the imatinib group. The most common adverse events were similar between treatment groups. Arterial occlusive events were infrequent and comparable between groups (ponatinib, 2.5%; imatinib, 1.2%). Conclusions and Relevance: Ponatinib demonstrated a superior rate of MRD-negative complete remission at the end of induction vs imatinib when combined with reduced-intensity chemotherapy in adults with newly diagnosed Ph+ ALL. The safety profile of ponatinib was comparable with imatinib. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03589326.

Enteropathy and intestinal malabsorption in patients treated with antihypertensive drugs. A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate differences in the incidence of enteropathy or intestinal malabsorption in patients taking angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI), calcium channel blocker (CCB), and beta blockers (BBs) at a single center in Korea. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we utilized data from the Yangsan electronic medical records to identify 129,169 patients. These individuals were prescribed olmesartan, other ARBs, ACEI, CCB, and BBs between November 2008 and February 2021. RESULTS: Of the 44,775 patients, 51 (0.11%) were observed to have enteropathy or intestinal malabsorption. Compared with the ACEI group, the adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for enteropathy and intestinal malabsorption were OR=1.313 (95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.188-6.798], p=0.893) for olmesartan, OR=0.915 (95% CI: [0.525-1.595], p=0.754) for the other ARBs, OR=0.928 (95% CI: [0.200-4.307]; p=0.924) for the CCB, and OR=0.663 (95% CI: [0.151-2.906]; p=0.586) for the BBs group. These findings were adjusted for factors such as age, gender, duration of antihypertensive medication, and comorbidities. CONCLUSION: In a retrospective cohort study of patients on antihypertensive medications, no significant difference was found in the incidence of enteropathy or intestinal malabsorption when ACEI was compared to olmesartan, other ARBs, CCB, and BBs.

Pharmacokinetic Interactions Between Tegoprazan and the Combination of Clarithromycin, Amoxicillin and Bismuth in Healthy Chinese Subjects: An Open-Label, Single-Center, Multiple-Dosage, Self-Controlled, Phase I Trial.

BACKGROUND: Tegoprazan is a potassium-competitive acid blocker that inhibits gastric acid and which may be used for eradicating Helicobacter pylori. This study focuses on the pharmacokinetic interaction and safety between tegoprazan and the combination of clarithromycin, amoxicillin and bismuth in healthy Chinese subjects. METHODS: An open-label, three-period, single-center, multiple-dosage, single-sequence, phase I trial was conducted in 22 healthy subjects. In period 1, the subjects took tegoprazan 50 mg twice daily for 7 days, and in period 2 they were administered clarithromycin 500 mg, amoxicillin 1000 mg and bismuth potassium citrate 600 mg twice daily for 7 days (days 14-20). Tegoprazan, clarithromycin, amoxicillin and bismuth potassium citrate were then administered in combination for 7 days (days 21-27) in period 3. Blood samples were collected up to 12 h after the last dose of each period. Safety assessments were performed in each period. RESULTS: The geometric mean ratios (GMRs) [90% confidence interval (CI)] of maximum plasma concentration at steady state (Cmax,ss) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve over the dosing interval (AUCτ) at steady state were 195.93% (175.52-218.71%) and 287.54% (263.28-314.04%) for tegoprazan and 423.23% (382.57-468.22%) and 385.61% (354.62-419.30%) for tegoprazan metabolite M1, respectively. The GMRs (90% CI) of Cmax,ss and AUCτ were 83.69% (77.44-90.45%) and 110.30% (102.74-118.41%) for clarithromycin, 126.25% (114.73-138.93%) and 146.94% (135.33-159.55%) for 14-hydroxyclarithromycin, 75.89% (69.73-82.60%) and 94.34% (87.94-101.20%) for amoxicillin, and 158.43% (125.43-200.11%) and 183.63% (156.42-215.58%) for bismuth, respectively. All reported adverse events were mild. The frequency of adverse events during the coadministration stage was not higher than that during the single- or triple-drug administration stages. CONCLUSION: The plasma exposure of tegoprazan, M1, 14-hydroxyclarithromycin and bismuth was increased after the coadministration of tegoprazan, clarithromycin, amoxicillin and bismuth. The coadministration exhibited favorable safety and tolerability. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: CTR20230643.

The Role of CYPs and Transporters in the Biotransformation and Transport of the Anti-hepatitis C Antiviral Agents Asunaprevir, Daclatasvir, and Beclabuvir: Impact of Liver Disease, Race and Drug-drug Interactions on Safety and Efficacy.

Asunaprevir, daclatasvir, and beclabuvir are direct-acting antiviral agents used in the treatment of patients infected with hepatitis C genotype 1b. This article reviews the biotransformation and disposition of these drugs in relation to the safety and efficacy of therapy. CYP3A4 and 3A5 catalyze the oxidative biotransformation of the drugs, while P-glycoprotein mediates their efflux from tissues. Asunaprevir is also a substrate for the influx transporters OATP1B1 and OATP2B1 and the efflux transporter MRP2, while beclabuvir is also a substrate for the efflux transporter BCRP. Liver disease decreases the expression of CYPs and transporters that mediate drug metabolism and disposition. Serum asunaprevir concentrations, but not those of daclatasvir or beclabuvir, are increased in patients with severe liver disease, which may produce toxicity. Pharmacogenomic variation in CYPs and transporters also has the potential to disrupt therapy with asunaprevir, daclatasvir and beclabuvir; some variants are more prevalent in certain racial groups. Pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions, especially where asunaprevir, daclatasvir, and beclabuvir are victim drugs, are mediated by coadministered rifampicin, ketoconazole and ritonavir, and are attributable to inhibition and/or induction of CYPs and transporters. Conversely, there is also evidence that asunaprevir, daclatasvir and beclabuvir are perpetrators of drug interactions with coadministered rosuvastatin and dextromethorphan. Together, liver disease, pharmacogenomic variation and drug-drug interactions may disrupt therapy with asunaprevir, daclatasvir and beclabuvir due to the impaired function of important CYPs and transporters.

Patient preference, efficacy, and compliance with zoledronic acid for glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis in patients with autoimmune diseases.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the preference, patient satisfaction, and efficacy of zoledronic acid compared with oral bisphosphonates (BPs) for glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) in patients with autoimmune diseases. METHODS: We enrolled 50 patients with new fractures or osteoporosis detected on follow-up bone densitometry after at least 1 year of oral BP use among patients diagnosed with GIOP during treatment for autoimmune diseases. After 1 year of zoledronic acid treatment, patients completed a survey for preference and satisfaction assessment. Treatment efficacy was analysed by comparing bone mineral density changes and fractures with those in a control group of patients who continued oral BP use. RESULTS: Age, sex, treatment duration, and medication history did not differ significantly between the two groups. Among the participants, 86.7% preferred and were more satisfied with intravenous zoledronic acid than with oral BPs, primarily because of the convenience of its administration interval. Only two patients (4%) reported infusion-related adverse events with zoledronic acid. Furthermore, no significant differences were observed in the annualized percentage change in the bone mineral density of the lumbar spine, femur neck, and hip between patients receiving zoledronic acid and those receiving oral BPs. The occurrence of new fractures was consistent across both groups, with two cases in each, showing no significant differences. CONCLUSION: Patients showed a preference for and greater satisfaction with zoledronic acid, and its efficacy in treating osteoporosis was comparable to that of oral BPs. Therefore, zoledronic acid is a suitable treatment option for GIOP in patients with autoimmune diseases.

The safety and efficacy of dabrafenib and trametinib in patients with glioma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Dabrafenib and trametinib represent targeted therapy options under investigation for treatment of gliomas harboring BRAF V600 mutations. We systematically reviewed the literature and conducted meta-analyses to assess the efficacy and safety of these agents. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were searched from inception to September 2023 for studies examining dabrafenib and/or trametinib for gliomas. Outcomes included response rates (ORR, CR, PR), progression rates (PD), 6- and 12-month PFS, adverse events, and dosing modifications. Meta-analyses were conducted using random effect models. RESULTS: Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis demonstrated overall response rates (ORR) of 50% (95% confidence interval (CI): 35-65%) for low-grade gliomas (LGG) and 40% (95% CI: 29-51%) for high-grade gliomas (HGG). Pooled ORR was 45% (95% CI: 36-54%) for both glioma grades. The complete response rate was 13% (95% CI: 05-27%) for HGG and 5% (95% CI: 1-10%) for both LGG and HGG. Six-month progression-free survival (PFS) rates reached 87% in LGG and 67% in HGG and a pooled 6-month PFS 78% (95% CI: 58-98%), declining at 12 months to 67% and 44%, respectively, with a pooled 12-month PFS 56% (95% CI: 34-79%). Grade 1-4 adverse events occurred in 100% of LGG and 63% of HGG patients. CONCLUSIONS: Dabrafenib and trametinib demonstrate promising anti-tumor efficacy in gliomas, particularly low-grade tumors, achieving durable disease stabilization in many patients. However, toxicity significantly limited tolerability. Additional research should further examine efficacy and refine safe administration protocols across glioma subtypes.

Deciphering the role of adjuvant therapy in melanoma and its actual benefits.

Numerous clinical trials have demonstrated a significant improvement in recurrence-free survival among melanoma patients receiving high-dose interferon-α, immune checkpoint inhibitors (pembrolizumab, nivolumab), and BRAF/MEK inhibitors (dabrafenib-trametinib). This study aimed to investigate whether these findings hold true in real-world conditions for patients with stage III and IV melanoma. In particular, the study explores the efficacy and side effects of adjuvant therapies, focusing on anti-PD-1 antibodies and BRAF/MEK inhibitors. While clinical trials have shown comparable efficacy, differences in side-effect profiles, especially the persistence of immune-related adverse events with anti-PD-1 antibodies, highlight the need for careful consideration in adjuvant settings. In the absence of established biomarkers for guiding adjuvant therapy decisions, it becomes imperative to transparently communicate the advantages and disadvantages of drug administration to patients. The study also delved into the impact of melanoma subtype and BRAF mutation status on the effectiveness of adjuvant therapy, emphasizing the need for further investigation.

A phase 1 study of triple-targeted therapy with BRAF, MEK, and AKT inhibitors for patients with BRAF-mutated cancers.

BACKGROUND: Aberrant PI3K/AKT signaling in BRAF-mutant cancers contributes to resistance to BRAF inhibitors. The authors examined dual MAPK and PI3K pathway inhibition in patients who had BRAF-mutated solid tumors (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01902173). METHODS: Patients with BRAF V600E/V600K-mutant solid tumors received oral dabrafenib at 150 mg twice daily with dose escalation of oral uprosertib starting at 50 mg daily, or, in the triplet cohorts, with dose escalation of both oral trametinib starting at 1.5 mg daily and oral uprosertib starting at 25 mg daily. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were assessed within the first 56 days of treatment. Radiographic responses were assessed at 8-week intervals. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients (22 evaluable) were enrolled in parallel doublet and triplet cohorts. No DLTs were observed in the doublet cohorts (N = 7). One patient had a DLT at the maximum administered dose of triplet therapy (dabrafenib 150 mg twice daily and trametinib 2 mg daily plus uprosertib 75 mg daily). Three patients in the doublet cohorts had partial responses (including one who had BRAF inhibitor-resistant melanoma). Two patients in the triplet cohorts had a partial response, and one patient had an unconfirmed partial response. Pharmacokinetic data suggested reduced dabrafenib and dabrafenib metabolite exposure in patients who were also exposed to both trametinib and uprosertib, but not in whose who were exposed to uprosertib without trametinib. CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant inhibition of both the MAPK and PI3K-AKT pathways for the treatment of BRAF-mutated cancers was well tolerated, leading to objective responses, but higher level drug-drug interactions affected exposure to dabrafenib and its metabolites.