Supporting patients in the transition to the revised pexidartinib dosing regimen: perspectives from the multidisciplinary clinical and allied health professional team.

Pexidartinib is a colony-stimulating factor-1 receptor inhibitor approved in the United States for treatment of adult patients with symptomatic tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT) associated with severe morbidity or functional limitations and not amenable to improvement with surgery. Because of the risk of severe and potentially fatal hepatotoxicity, pexidartinib is only available through a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) program. Pexidartinib pharmacokinetics are influenced by the fat content of meals: compared with the fasted state, consuming a high-fat meal with pexidartinib increases pexidartinib absorption by 100%; a low-fat meal increases absorption by approximately 60%. Pexidartinib was initially authorized to be taken at 800 mg/day on an empty stomach; therefore, if this same dose of pexidartinib is taken with food, there is a risk of overexposure and potential toxicity. To reduce the risk of hepatotoxicity and improve patient compliance, pexidartinib has undergone a revised dosing regimen, from 800 mg/day (400 mg twice daily) fasted to 500 mg/day (250 mg twice daily) with a low-fat meal (approximately 11-14 g of total fat). The objective of this report is to educate clinical and allied health professionals on the revised dosing regimen and the importance of patient compliance with a low-fat meal. Healthcare professionals need to understand the rationale for the switch from pexidartinib dosing on an empty stomach to dosing with a low-fat meal and how meal composition and timing influence pharmacokinetics. Finally, we provide guidance for the healthcare team of prescribing providers, nurses, pharmacists, and dietitians who are caring for patients with TGCT on pexidartinib. It is important for healthcare providers to deliver consistent messaging on the low-fat meal requirement and help patients fit pexidartinib into their regular meal schedules. Consulting a dietitian may be helpful for patients, especially those with complex dietary needs. We provide an overview of the roles and responsibilities of each healthcare professional and outline steps to best support patients, including key questions and answers related to the revised dosing regimen. This report provides the information necessary to guide the multidisciplinary team caring for patients with TGCT and to support them through the pexidartinib dosing regimen change.

Utilization of a periodontal endoscope in nonsurgical periodontal therapy: A randomized, split-mouth clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The removal of subgingival calculus to obtain gingival health is an integral part of nonsurgical periodontal therapy. The periodontal endoscope is used by some clinicians to help enhance access to effectively remove subgingival calculus; however, longer-term studies on this subject are still lacking. The purpose of this randomized, controlled clinical trial was to compare the clinical outcomes of scaling and root planing (SRP) using a periodontal endoscope versus conventional SRP using loupes for up to 12 months, utilizing a split-mouth design. METHODS: Twenty-five patients were recruited who exhibited generalized stage II or stage III periodontitis. SRP was rendered by the same experienced hygienist using either a periodontal endoscope or conventional SRP using loupes, following random assignment of the left and right halves of the mouth. All periodontal evaluations were done by the same periodontal resident at baseline, and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after therapy. RESULTS: Single-rooted teeth interproximal sites displayed a significantly lower percentage of improved sites (P < 0.05) than multirooted teeth for probing depth and clinical attachment level (CAL). Maxillary multirooted interproximal sites favored the use of the periodontal endoscope at the 3- and 6-month time periods (P = 0.017 and 0.019, respectively) in terms of the percentage of sites with improved CAL. Mandibular multirooted interproximal sites showed more sites with improved CAL using conventional SRP than with the periodontal endoscope (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Overall, the use of a periodontal endoscope was more beneficial in multirooted sites compared to single-rooted sites, specifically in maxillary multirooted sites.