Ruxolitinib associated psoas muscle tuberculosis abscess in a primary myelofibrosis woman: A case report and literature review.

RATIONALE: Primary myelofibrosis is a subtype of myeloproliferative neoplasm that leads to bone marrow fibrosis. Historically, the only curative option for primary myelofibrosis was allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant. Ruxolitinib, a Janus kinase inhibitor, is now used for the treatment of primary myelofibrosis and polycythemia vera. It effectively improves symptoms related to splenomegaly and anemia. However, its association with the development of opportunistic infections has been observed in clinical studies and practical application. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 64-year-old female with primary myelofibrosis and chronic hepatitis B infection who received ruxolitinib treatment. She was admitted for spiking fever and altered consciousness. DIAGNOSIS: Tuberculosis meningitis was suspected but cerebrospinal fluid can't identify any pathogens. An abdominal computed tomography scan revealed a left psoas abscess and an enlarged spleen. A computed tomography-guided pus drainage procedure was performed, showing a strong positive acid-fast stain and a positive Mycobacterium tuberculosis polymerase chain reaction result. INTERVENTIONS: antituberculosis medications were administered. The patient developed a psoas muscle abscess caused by tuberculosis and multiple dermatomes of herpes zoster during antituberculosis treatment. OUTCOMES: The patient was ultimately discharged after 6 weeks of treatment without apparent neurological sequelae. LESSONS: This case underscores the importance of clinicians evaluating latent infections and ensuring full vaccination prior to initiating ruxolitinib-related treatment for primary myelofibrosis.

A case report of drug interaction between co-packaged nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and tacrolimus causing hyponatremia in a lung transplant recipient.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection in lung transplant recipients can be lethal owing to the use of immunosuppressants. Antiviral agents may be administered to these patients. Co-packaged nirmatrelvir-ritonavir is a new agent currently being used in combination. CASE PRESENTATION: In this report, we present a case of a 64-year-old woman, a lung transplant recipient, who experienced hyponatremia and showed a high serum tacrolimus concentration following the administration of the co-packaged nirmatrelvir-ritonavir combination. CONCLUSION: Although the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and tacrolimus combination is not contraindicated, other treatment strategies should be considered first, if available, and the dose of tacrolimus should be reduced when using the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir combination. In cases where combination therapy is necessary, serum tacrolimus levels should be closely monitored in lung transplant recipients. Documentation of more such reports is important to identify drug interactions between nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and other agents, with the aim of preventing severe adverse effects.

Efficacy and Safety of Ponesimod Compared with Teriflunomide in Female Patients with Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis: Findings from the Pivotal OPTIMUM Study.

Background: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is threefold more prevalent in women than men. However, sex-specific efficacy analysis for MS disease-modifying therapies is not typically performed. Methods: Post hoc analyses of data from female patients enrolled in the phase 3, double-blind OPTIMUM study of relapsing MS were carried out. Eligible adults were randomized to ponesimod 20 mg or teriflunomide 14 mg once daily for up to 108 weeks. The primary endpoint was annualized relapse rate (ARR); secondary endpoints included change in symptom domain of Fatigue Symptom and Impact Questionnaire-Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis (FSIQ-RMS) at week 108, number of combined unique active lesions (CUALs) per year on magnetic resonance imaging, and time to 12- and 24-week confirmed disability accumulation (CDA). Results: A total of 735 female patients (581 of childbearing potential) were randomized to ponesimod (n = 363, 49.4%) or teriflunomide (n = 372, 50.6%). Relative risk reduction in the ARR for ponesimod versus teriflunomide was 33.1% (mean, 0.192 vs. 0.286, respectively; p < 0.002). Mean difference in FSIQ-RMS for ponesimod versus teriflunomide was -4.34 (0.12 vs. 4.46; p = 0.002); rate ratio in CUALs per year, 0.601 (1.45 vs. 2.41; p < 0.0001), and hazard ratio for time to 12- and 24-week CDA risk estimates, 0.83 (10.7% vs. 12.9%; p = 0.38) and 0.91 (8.8% vs. 9.7%; p = 0.69), respectively. Incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between treatment groups (89.0% and 90.1%). Conclusions: Analyses demonstrate the efficacy and safety of ponesimod, versus active comparator, for women with relapsing MS, supporting data-informed decision-making for women with MS. Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT02425644.

Endocrine-Sensitive Disease Rate in Postmenopausal Patients With Estrogen Receptor-Rich/ERBB2-Negative Breast Cancer Receiving Neoadjuvant Anastrozole, Fulvestrant, or Their Combination: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Adding fulvestrant to anastrozole (A+F) improved survival in postmenopausal women with advanced estrogen receptor (ER)-positive/ERBB2 (formerly HER2)-negative breast cancer. However, the combination has not been tested in early-stage disease. Objective: To determine whether neoadjuvant fulvestrant or A+F increases the rate of pathologic complete response or ypT1-2N0/N1mic/Ki67 2.7% or less residual disease (referred to as endocrine-sensitive disease) over anastrozole alone. Design, Setting, and Participants: A phase 3 randomized clinical trial assessing differences in clinical and correlative outcomes between each of the fulvestrant-containing arms and the anastrozole arm. Postmenopausal women with clinical stage II to III, ER-rich (Allred score 6-8 or >66%)/ERBB2-negative breast cancer were included. All analyses were based on data frozen on March 2, 2023. Interventions: Patients received anastrozole, fulvestrant, or a combination for 6 months preoperatively. Tumor Ki67 was assessed at week 4 and optionally at week 12, and if greater than 10% at either time point, the patient switched to neoadjuvant chemotherapy or immediate surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the endocrine-sensitive disease rate (ESDR). A secondary outcome was the percentage change in Ki67 after 4 weeks of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) (week 4 Ki67 suppression). Results: Between February 2014 and November 2018, 1362 female patients (mean [SD] age, 65.0 [8.2] years) were enrolled. Among the 1298 evaluable patients, ESDRs were 18.7% (95% CI, 15.1%-22.7%), 22.8% (95% CI, 18.9%-27.1%), and 20.5% (95% CI, 16.8%-24.6%) with anastrozole, fulvestrant, and A+F, respectively. Compared to anastrozole, neither fulvestrant-containing regimen significantly improved ESDR or week 4 Ki67 suppression. The rate of week 4 or week 12 Ki67 greater than 10% was 25.1%, 24.2%, and 15.7% with anastrozole, fulvestrant, and A+F, respectively. Pathologic complete response/residual cancer burden class I occurred in 8 of 167 patients and 17 of 167 patients, respectively (15.0%; 95% CI, 9.9%-21.3%), after switching to neoadjuvant chemotherapy due to week 4 or week 12 Ki67 greater than 10%. PAM50 subtyping derived from RNA sequencing of baseline biopsies available for 753 patients (58%) identified 394 luminal A, 304 luminal B, and 55 nonluminal tumors. A+F led to a greater week 4 Ki67 suppression than anastrozole alone in luminal B tumors (median [IQR], -90.4% [-95.2 to -81.9%] vs -76.7% [-89.0 to -55.6%]; P < .001), but not luminal A tumors. Thirty-six nonluminal tumors (65.5%) had a week 4 or week 12 Ki67 greater than 10%. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, neither fulvestrant nor A+F significantly improved the 6-month ESDR over anastrozole in ER-rich/ERBB2-negative breast cancer. Aromatase inhibition remains the standard-of-care NET. Differential NET response by PAM50 subtype in exploratory analyses warrants further investigation. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01953588.

Usage of vildagliptin among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus attending a public primary healthcare clinics in Kuala Selangor District, Selangor.

INTRODUCTION: Studies showed that vildagliptin can lower HbA1c levels by 0.8%-1%. However, there is limited data looking at vildagliptin use among suburban populations. The efficacy of vildagliptin use may differ among different populations, especially those with low socio-economic status. Thus, this study aimed to assess the HbA1c reduction after vildagliptin initiation, treatment patterns and the reason for its initiation among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus attending outpatient clinics in Kuala Selangor District, Selangor. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a cross-sectional, retrospective study design. All patients who received vildagliptin in the Pharmacy Integrated Health System (PHIS) registry database from 2016 to 2021 were included as study samples. The exclusion criteria were being less than 18 years old and having type 1 diabetes mellitus. Patients' medical records were retrieved after sampling, and data were collected. One medical record was missing, thus SPSS analysis were performed on 144 vildagliptin users. RESULTS: In total, 84 females (58.3%) and 60 males (41.7%) with a mean age of 62.1 (±10.1) years were analysed in this study. Mean HbA1c pre-therapy was 8.5 ± 2.1%; while posttherapy 6 months demonstrated a mean HbA1c of 7.9 ± 1.8%. Use of vildagliptin alone or as an adjunct was associated with a mean reduction of 0.6% in HbA1c (p = 0.01). Factors influencing this HbA1c reduction were advancing age, specifically individuals aged 62 years and older (p = 0.02), patients who are already receiving insulin therapy (p=0.00) and those who express a willingness to commence insulin treatment during the counselling session prior to initiating the treatment plan (p = 0.00). Reasons for vildagliptin initiation documented by prescribers were non-insulin acceptance (n = 59, 40.97%), frequent hypoglycaemia (n = 6, 4.1%) and non-compliance with medications (n = 23, 15.9%). There was no association between demographic, medical background and reason for starting vildagliptin variables and HbA1c reduction (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study showed that initiating vildagliptin alone or as an adjunct therapy significantly reduced HbA1c and is beneficial for uncontrolled diabetes patients. While advancing age, concurrent administration of insulin and the patients' willingness to accept insulin treatment prior to the commencement of therapy were the factors that influenced HbA1c reduction among patients receiving vildagliptin therapy, we recommend primary care providers prioritise all of the significant variables discovered before initiating vildagliptin for their patients.

Bosutinib: Pediatric First Approval.

Bosutinib (BOSULIF®), an orally administered BCR-ABL tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) developed by Pfizer Inc., is well established in the EU and the USA as a treatment for adults with newly diagnosed (ND) chronic phase (CP) Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML), and for CP, accelerated phase and blast phase Ph+ CML that is resistant or intolerant (R/I) to prior therapy. In September 2023, based on clinical data from patients aged ≥ 1 to < 18 years, bosutinib was approved in the USA for the treatment of pediatric patients aged ≥ 1 year with CP Ph+ CML that is ND or R/I to prior therapy. This article summarizes the milestones in the development of bosutinib leading to this first pediatric approval.

Bosutinib in Resistant and Intolerant Pediatric Patients With Chronic Phase Chronic Myeloid Leukemia: Results From the Phase I Part of Study ITCC054/COG AAML1921.

PURPOSE: Bosutinib is approved for adults with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML): 400 mg once daily in newly diagnosed (ND); 500 mg once daily in resistant/intolerant (R/I) patients. Bosutinib has a different tolerability profile than other tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and potentially less impact on growth (preclinical data). The primary objective of this first-in-child trial was to determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) for pediatric R/I and ND patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the phase I part of this international, open-label trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04258943), children age 1-18 years with R/I (per European LeukemiaNet 2013) Ph+ CML were enrolled using a 6 + 4 design, testing 300, 350, and 400 mg/m2 once daily with food. The RP2D was the dose resulting in 0/6 or 1/10 dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) during the first cycle and achieving adult target AUC levels for the respective indication. As ND participants were only enrolled in phase II, the ND RP2D was selected based on data from R/I patients. RESULTS: Thirty patients were enrolled; 27 were evaluable for DLT: six at 300 mg/m2, 11 at 350 mg/m2 (one DLT), and 10 at 400 mg/m2 (one DLT). The mean AUCs at 300 mg/m2, 350 mg/m2, and 400 mg/m2 were 2.20 µg h/mL, 2.52 µg h/mL, and 2.66 µg h/mL, respectively. The most common adverse event was diarrhea (93%; ≥grade 3: 11%). Seven patients stopped because of intolerance and eight because of insufficient response. Complete cytogenetic and major molecular response to bosutinib appeared comparable with other published phase I/II trials with second-generation TKIs in children. CONCLUSION: Bosutinib was safe and effective. The pediatric RP2D was 400 mg/m2 once daily (max 600 mg/d) with food in R/I patients and 300 mg/m2 once daily (max 500 mg/d) with food in ND patients, which achieved targeted exposures as per adult experience.

Impact of age and comorbidities on the efficacy and tolerability of bosutinib in previously treated patients with chronic myeloid leukemia: results from the phase 4 BYOND study.

In the phase 4 BYOND trial, patients with pretreated chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) received bosutinib (starting dose: 500 mg/day). Efficacy and safety after ≥3 years of follow-up in 156 patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic phase CML by age and Charlson Comorbidity Index scores (without the age component; mCCI) is reported. Cumulative major molecular response rates at any time on treatment were 73.6%, 64.5%, and 74.1% in patients <65, 65-74, and ≥75 years of age, and 77.9%, 63.0%, and 59.3% in patients with mCCI scores 2, 3, and ≥4, respectively. Patients <65, 65-74, and ≥75 years of age experienced grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) at rates of 74.7%, 78.8%, and 96.4% and permanent discontinuations due to AEs at rates of 22.1%, 39.4%, and 46.4%, respectively. In patients with mCCI 2, 3, and ≥4, respective rates of grade 3/4 TEAEs were 77.8%, 77.8%, and 86.7%, and permanent discontinuations due to AEs were 25.3%, 33.3%, and 43.3%. In conclusion, a substantial proportion of patients maintained/achieved cytogenetic and molecular responses across age groups and mCCI scores. Older patients (≥75 years) and those with high comorbidity burden (mCCI ≥4) may require more careful monitoring due to the increased risk of TEAEs. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02228382.

[Optimizing the use of bosutinib in patients with chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia: Recommendations of a panel of experts from the Fi-LMC (French CML working group)]. / Optimisation du bosutinib dans la leucémie myéloïde chronique : recommandations du Fi-LMC (France Intergroupe des leucémies myéloïdes chroniques).

The treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia relies on orally available tyrosine kinase inhibitors targeting the BCR::ABL1 oncoprotein. Bosutinib is a second generation adenosine triphosphate-competitive inhibitor approved for use in frontline adult chronic phase-chronic myeloid leukemia and all phases-chronic myeloid leukemia in the second line setting or beyond. Its efficacy was demonstrated in several pivotal clinical trials at 400mg once daily in the first line context and at 500mg once daily beyond first line. Bosutinib-related adverse events frequently occur early after treatment initiation and include gastro-intestinal symptoms and cytolytic hepatitis. These drug-related adverse events must be properly managed in order to preserve safety, efficacy and treatment acceptability. The French chronic myeloid leukemia study group gathered a panel of experts in hematology, pharmacology and hepatology in order to elaborate practical recommendations on the management of bosutinib treatment. These recommendations aim at optimizing the short and long-term tolerance and benefit/risk balance of bosutinib, mainly focusing at gastro-intestinal and liver toxicities.

GnRH antagonist monotherapy versus a GnRH agonist plus bicalutamide for advanced hormone-sensitive prostate cancer; KYUCOG-1401.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness and safety of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist monotherapy to combined androgen blockade (CAB) with a GnRH agonist and bicalutamide in patients with advanced hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC). METHODS: The study was conducted as KYUCOG-1401 trial (UMIN000014243) and enrolled 200 patients who were randomly assigned to either group A (GnRH antagonist monotherapy followed by the addition of bicalutamide) or group B (CAB by a GnRH agonist and bicalutamide). The primary endpoint was PSA progression-free survival. The secondary endpoints were the time to CAB treatment failure, radiographic progression-free survival, overall survival, changes in serum parameters, including PSA, hormones, and bone and lipid metabolic markers, and adverse events. RESULTS: PSA progression-free survival was significantly longer in group B (hazard ratio [HR], 95% confidence interval [CI]; 1.40, 1.01-1.95, p = 0.041). The time to CAB treatment failure was slightly longer in group A (HR, 95% CI; 0.80, 0.59-1.08, p = 0.146). No significant differences were observed in radiographic progression-free survival or overall survival. The percentage of patients with serum testosterone that did not reach the castration level was higher at 60 weeks (p = 0.046) in group A. No significant differences were noted in the serum levels of bone metabolic or lipid markers between the two groups. An injection site reaction was more frequent in group A. CONCLUSIONS: The present results support the potential of CAB using a GnRH agonist and bicalutamide as a more effective treatment for advanced HSPC than GnRH antagonist monotherapy.

Improved Outcomes with Enzalutamide in Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with prostate cancer who have high-risk biochemical recurrence have an increased risk of progression. The efficacy and safety of enzalutamide plus androgen-deprivation therapy and enzalutamide monotherapy, as compared with androgen-deprivation therapy alone, are unknown. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients with prostate cancer who had high-risk biochemical recurrence with a prostate-specific antigen doubling time of 9 months or less. Patients were randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, to receive enzalutamide (160 mg) daily plus leuprolide every 12 weeks (combination group), placebo plus leuprolide (leuprolide-alone group), or enzalutamide monotherapy (monotherapy group). The primary end point was metastasis-free survival, as assessed by blinded independent central review, in the combination group as compared with the leuprolide-alone group. A key secondary end point was metastasis-free survival in the monotherapy group as compared with the leuprolide-alone group. Other secondary end points were patient-reported outcomes and safety. RESULTS: A total of 1068 patients underwent randomization: 355 were assigned to the combination group, 358 to the leuprolide-alone group, and 355 to the monotherapy group. The patients were followed for a median of 60.7 months. At 5 years, metastasis-free survival was 87.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 83.0 to 90.6) in the combination group, 71.4% (95% CI, 65.7 to 76.3) in the leuprolide-alone group, and 80.0% (95% CI, 75.0 to 84.1) in the monotherapy group. With respect to metastasis-free survival, enzalutamide plus leuprolide was superior to leuprolide alone (hazard ratio for metastasis or death, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.61; P<0.001); enzalutamide monotherapy was also superior to leuprolide alone (hazard ratio for metastasis or death, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.87; P = 0.005). No new safety signals were observed, with no substantial between-group differences in quality-of-life measures. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with prostate cancer with high-risk biochemical recurrence, enzalutamide plus leuprolide was superior to leuprolide alone with respect to metastasis-free survival; enzalutamide monotherapy was also superior to leuprolide alone. The safety profile of enzalutamide was consistent with that shown in previous clinical studies, with no apparent detrimental effect on quality of life. (Funded by Pfizer and Astellas Pharma; EMBARK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02319837.).

Post-hoc analysis of the safety and efficacy of isavuconazole in older patients with invasive fungal disease from the VITAL and SECURE studies.

Isavuconazole is a triazole with broad-spectrum antifungal activity. In this post-hoc analysis of two prospective clinical trials (VITAL and SECURE), the safety and efficacy of isavuconazole in patients aged ≥ 65 years with invasive fungal diseases were evaluated. Patients were divided into two subgroups (≥ 65 and < 65 years). Adverse events (AEs); all-cause mortality; and overall, clinical, mycological, and radiological response were assessed. A total of 155 patients ≥ 65 years were enrolled in both trials. Most patients reported AEs. In the isavuconazole arm of both studies, serious AEs (SAEs) were greater in patients ≥ 65 versus < 65 years: 76.7% versus 56.9% (VITAL); 61.9% versus 49.0% (SECURE). In SECURE, SAE rates were similar in the ≥ 65 years subgroup of both treatment arms (61.9% vs 58.1%), while in the < 65 years subgroup the SAE rate was lower in the isavuconazole arm (49.0% vs 57.4%). In VITAL, all-cause mortality through day 42 (30.0% vs 13.8%) was higher, and overall response at end of treatment (27.6% vs 46.8%) was lower in patients ≥ 65 years versus < 65 years. In SECURE, all-cause mortality was similar between both subgroups, and isavuconazole (20.6% vs 17.9%) and voriconazole (22.6% vs 19.4%) treatment arms. The overall response was lower in the ≥ 65 years than the < 65 years subgroup in the isavuconazole (23.7% vs 39.0%) and voriconazole (32.0% vs 37.5%) arms. The safety and efficacy of isavuconazole were better in patients < 65 versus ≥ 65 years, and the safety profile was more favorable than that of voriconazole in both subgroups.Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT00634049 and NCT00412893.

Postoperative Adjuvant Anastrozole for 10 or 5 Years in Patients With Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer: AERAS, a Randomized Multicenter Open-Label Phase III Trial.

PURPOSE: Treatment with an aromatase inhibitor for 5 years is the standard treatment for postmenopausal hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. We investigated the effects of extending this treatment to 10 years on disease-free survival (DFS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective, randomized, multicenter open-label phase III study assessed the effect of extending anastrozole treatment for an additional 5 years in postmenopausal patients who were disease-free after treatment with either 5 years of anastrozole alone or 2-3 years of tamoxifen followed by 2-3 years of anastrozole. Patients were allocated randomly (1:1) to continue anastrozole for an additional 5 years or stop anastrozole. The primary end point was DFS, including breast cancer recurrence, second primary cancers, and death from any cause. This study is registered with University Hospital Medical Information Network, Japan (UMIN) clinical trials registry (UMIN000000818). RESULTS: We enrolled 1,697 patients from 117 facilities between November 2007 and November 2012. Follow-up information was available for 1,593 patients (n = 787 in the continue group, n = 806 in the stop group), who were defined as the full analysis set, including 144 patients previously treated with tamoxifen and 259 patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery without irradiation. The 5-year DFS rates were 91% (95% CI, 89 to 93) in the continue group and 86% (95% CI, 83 to 88) in the stop group (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.82; P < .0010). Notably, extended anastrozole treatment reduced the incidence of local recurrence (continue group, n = 10; stop group, n = 27) and second primary cancers (continue group, n = 27; stop group, n = 52). There was no significant difference in overall or distant DFS. Menopausal or bone-related all-grade adverse events were more frequent among patients in the continue group than those in the stop group, but the incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events was <1% in both groups. CONCLUSION: Continuing adjuvant anastrozole for an additional 5 years after 5 years of initial treatment with anastrozole or tamoxifen followed by anastrozole was well tolerated and improved DFS. Although no difference in overall survival was observed as in other trials, extended anastrozole therapy could be one treatment choice in postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

Cardiovascular outcomes among patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer: A comparative safety study using US administrative claims data.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular conditions are the most prevalent comorbidity among patients with prostate cancer, regardless of treatment. Additionally, cardiovascular risk has been shown to increase following exposure to certain treatments for advanced prostate cancer. There is conflicting evidence on risk of overall and specific cardiovascular outcomes among men treated for metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). We, therefore, sought to compare incidence of serious cardiovascular events among CRPC patients treated with abiraterone acetate plus predniso(lo)ne (AAP) and enzalutamide (ENZ), the two most widely used CRPC therapies. METHODS: Using US administrative claims data, we selected CRPC patients newly exposed to either treatment after August 31, 2012, with prior androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). We assessed incidence of hospitalization for heart failure (HHF), ischemic stroke, and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) during the period 30-days after AAP or ENZ initiation to discontinuation, outcome occurrence, death, or disenrollment. We matched treatment groups on propensity-scores (PSs) to control for observed confounding to estimate the average treatment effect among the treated (AAP) using conditional Cox proportional hazards models. To account for residual bias, we calibrated our estimates against a distribution of effect estimates from 124 negative-control outcomes. RESULTS: The HHF analysis included 2322 (45.1%) AAP initiators and 2827 (54.9%) ENZ initiators. In this analysis, the median follow-up times among AAP and ENZ initiators (after PS matching) were 144 and 122 days, respectively. The empirically calibrated hazard ratio (HR) estimate for HHF was 2.56 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.32, 4.94). Corresponding HRs for AMI and ischemic stroke were 1.94 (95% CI: 0.90, 4.18) and 1.25 (95% CI: 0.54, 2.85), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our study sought to quantify risk of HHF, AMI and ischemic stroke among CRPC patients initiating AAP relative to ENZ within a national administrative claims database. Increased risk for HHF among AAP compared to ENZ users was observed. The difference in myocardial infarction did not attain statistical significance after controlling for residual bias, and no differences were noted in ischemic stroke between the two treatments. These findings confirm labeled warnings and precautions for AAP for HHF and contribute to the comparative real-world evidence on AAP relative to ENZ.

Influence of the anti-oestrogens tamoxifen and letrozole on thyroid function in women with early and advanced breast cancer: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Breast cancer (BC) is a common type of cancer in women. Advances in therapy options have resulted in higher overall survival rates but side effects of cancer treatment are increasingly in the spotlight. The beneficial effects of anti-oestrogen therapy with tamoxifen and letrozole in the prevention of BC recurrence are well documented. While the most common side-effects of this therapy are well-defined, less is known about its effects on thyroid function. In women treated for early BC, an average of 1-5 kg weight gain has been observed after treatment with chemotherapy/anti-oestrogens. We aim to evaluate the current knowledge on the side effects of tamoxifen and letrozole treatments on thyroid function, followed by its potential influence on the observed weight gain. METHODS: We searched PubMed and found 16 publications on thyroid function and tamoxifen treatment in pre- and post-menopausal women with early- and advanced BC, whereas five publications on letrozole treatment in post-menopausal women with advanced BC. RESULTS: According to the current literature, there is an overall tendency towards a mild and transient thyroid dysfunction, that is, subclinical hypothyroidism in tamoxifen-treated patients. Only one publication reported further significant changes in thyroid hormones beyond one year of tamoxifen treatment. No significant changes in thyroid function have been observed among letrozole-treated patients. CONCLUSION: Tamoxifen-treated patients can develop mild and transient thyroid dysfunction within the first 12 months, yet further significant changes in thyroid function beyond one year of tamoxifen treatment have been reported in a single study. There is no evidence of thyroid dysfunction in letrozole-treated patients. Current literature does not focus on subclinical hypothyroidism as a possible cause of weight gain in patients with BC. Subgrouping of BC patients and studies with a longer observation of thyroid hormones and weight changes during and after anti-oestrogen treatment are needed to further elucidate how anti-oestrogens affect thyroid function.