¿Qué hay de nuevo en el tratamiento de amiloidosis por cadenas livianas? Parte 1: cadenas livianas / What is new in light chain amyloidosis treatment? Part 1: lightweight chains

La amiloidosis AL es una enfermedad debida al depósito, en órganos y tejidos, de fibrillas formadas por cadenas livianas producidas de forma patológica por plasmocitos clonales. Su tratamiento actualmente está orientado a erradicar el clon de células plasmáticas; este históricamente se extrapoló de tratamientos disponibles y estudiados para otras discrasias sanguíneas. En el año 2020, el Grupo de Estudio de Amiloidosis (GEA) confeccionó distintas guías de práctica clínica para el tratamiento de la amiloidosis AL. Desde entonces se han publicado ensayos clínicos que arrojan contundencia al conocimiento disponible hasta el momento, y están en desarrollo nuevas líneas de investigación que robustecen y estimulan el estudio en el área. En esta revisión se realiza una actualización de las guías existentes en lo que respecta al tratamiento de la amiloidosis por cadenas livianas.Como evidencia de relevancia, en el último año estuvieron disponibles resultados de ensayos clínicos que respaldan el uso de esquemas basados en daratumumab (un anticuerpo monoclonal anti-CD38+) para pacientes con diagnóstico reciente de amiloidosis AL como primera línea. Además, para el tratamiento de la amiloidosis AL refractaria o recaída, la disponibilidad de bibliografía respaldatoria es escasa y extrapolada del tratamiento del mieloma múltiple; sin embargo, actualmente existe evidencia de calidad para recomendar el uso de ixazomib, un inhibidor de proteosoma reversible por vía oral disponible en la Argentina desde 2020. Por último, se mencionan algunas líneas de investigación con otros anticuerpos monoclonales y terapéuticas basadas en el uso de CAR-T cells. (AU)

AL amyloidosis is a disease caused by the deposit in different organs and tissues of protein fibrils formed by light chains synthetized by pathological clonal plasma cells. Its treatment is currently aimed at eradicating this plasma cell clone and it has been historically extrapolated from available and validated treatments for other blood dyscrasias. In 2020, the Amyloidosis Study Group prepared different clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of AL amyloidosis.Since then, clinical trials have been published that confirm and strengthen the knowledge available up to now, and new lines of research are being developed that stimulate study in the area. In this review, an update of the existing guidelines regarding the treatment of AL amyloidosis is made. As relevant evidence, in the last year, results of clinical trials have been made available that support the use of regimens based on Daratumumab (an anti-CD38+ monoclonal antibody) for patients with newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis as first line therapy. In addition, for the treatment of refractory or relapsed AL amyloidosis, where the availability of supporting literature is scant and extrapolated from the treatment of multiple myeloma, there is currently quality evidence to recommend the use of ixazomib, an oral reversible proteasome inhibitor, only available in Argentina since 2020. Finally, some research lines exploring the efficacy of other monoclonal antibodies and therapeutic experiments based on the use of CAR-T cells are mentioned. (AU)

Monoclonal antibodies for Alzheimer disease: statistical significance vs clinical efficacy / Anticorpos monoclonais para doença de Alzheimer: significância estatística versus eficácia clínica

Nas últimas décadas, os anticorpos monoclonais (AcM) promoveram uma transformação dramática no tratamento de diversas doenças, especialmente nos linfomas, leucemias, câncer de mama e câncer colorretal. Estima-se que atualmente as indústrias de biotecnologia ligadas ao desenvolvimento de AcM são responsáveis por importante fatia do produto interno bruto de muitos países onde essas indústrias estão sediadas. Já as pesquisas com AcM para doença de Alzheimer (DA) alicerçadas na hipótese da cascata amiloide parecem não apresentar os mesmos resultados. Alguns ensaios clínicos realizados com crenezumabe e solanezumabe não conseguiram demonstrar uma desaceleração da progressão clínica da doença, fazendo com que seus respectivos laboratórios encerrassem novos ensaios clínicos com essas drogas. Não obstante a falha de eficácia de alguns fármacos, outros recentes resultados de ensaios clínicos facilitaram a aprovação do aducanumabe pelo Food and Drug Administration (FDA) dos Estados Unidos (EUA) em junho de 2021, um anticorpo monoclonal IgG1 humano anti-beta amiloide (Aß) seletivo, como o primeiro tratamento modificador da doença na DA, especificamente para as fases de comprometimento cognitivo leve (CCL) e de demência leve. Dois anos após, o FDA também concedeu aprovação acelerada a outro AcM, o lecanemabe, e muito provavelmente o mesmo ocorrerá com o donanemabe após recente publicação do ensaio clínico TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2.

In recent decades, monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) have dramatically shifted the treatment landscape for multiple malignant diseases, especially lymphomas and leukemias, breast cancer, and colorectal cancer. This change has been so momentous that many biotechnology companies involved in MAb discovery and development are currently estimated to account for a major share of the gross domestic product of their host countries. Research on MAb therapies for Alzheimer's disease (AD), however, all of which has been based on the amyloid cascade hypothesis, does not seem to have achieved similar results. Some clinical trials carried out with crenezumab and solanezumab failed to demonstrate slowing of clinical progression of AD, causing their respective manufacturers to discontinue further development. The lack of efficacy of these drugs notwithstanding, the recent results of clinical trials with another drug, aducanumab ­ a human IgG1 MAb which selectively targets aggregated amyloid-beta (Aß) ­ led to its FDA approval in June 2021 as the first ever disease-modifying treatment for AD, specifically at the mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and mild dementia stages. Two years later, the FDA granted accelerated approval to another MAb, lecanemab; a third, donanemab, is likely to follow, with the recent publication of the TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2 trial.

Efficacy and safety of fourth-generation CD19 CAR-T expressing IL7 and CCL19 along with PD-1 monoclonal antibody for relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma / 中华血液学杂志

Objective: This study systematically explore the efficacy and safety of fourth-generation chimeric antigen receptor T-cells (CAR-T), which express interleukin 7 (IL7) and chemokine C-C motif ligand 19 (CCL19) and target CD19, in relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma. Methods: Our center applied autologous 7×19 CAR-T combined with tirelizumab to treat 11 patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma. The efficacy and adverse effects were explored. Results: All 11 enrolled patients completed autologous 7×19 CAR-T preparation and infusion. Nine patients completed the scheduled six sessions of tirolizumab treatment, one completed four sessions, and one completed one session. Furthermore, five cases (45.5%) achieved complete remission, and three cases (27.3%) achieved partial remission with an objective remission rate of 72.7%. Two cases were evaluated for disease progression, and one died two months after reinfusion because of uncontrollable disease. The median follow-up time was 31 (2-34) months, with a median overall survival not achieved and a median progression-free survival of 28 (1-34) months. Two patients with partial remission achieved complete remission at the 9th and 12th months of follow-up. Therefore, the best complete remission rate was 63.6%. Cytokine-release syndrome and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome were controllable, and no immune-related adverse reactions occurred. Conclusion: Autologous 7×19 CAR-T combined with tirelizumab for treating relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma achieved good efficacy with controllable adverse reactions.

Humanized anti-CD25 monoclonal antibody as a salvage therapy for steroid-refractory acute graft-versus-host disease after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation / 中华血液学杂志

Objective: To investigate the efficacy of humanized anti-CD25 monoclonal antibody for steroid-refractory acute graft-versus-host disease (SR-aGVHD) in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) recipients. Methods: A total of 64 patients with SR-aGVHD between June 2019 and October 2020 in Suchow Hopes Hematology Hospital were enrolled in this study. Humanized anti-CD25 monoclonal antibodies 1 mg·kg(-1)·d(-1) were administered on days 1, 3, and 8, and then once per week according to the disease progression. Efficacy was assessed at days 7, 14, and 28 after humanized anti-CD 25 treatment. Results: Of the 64 patients with a median age of 31 (15-63) years, 38 (59.4%) were male and 26 (40.6%) were female. The overall response (OR) rate of the humanized CD25 monoclonal antibody in 64 patients with SR-aGVHD on days 7, 14, and 28 were 48.4% (31/64), 53.1% (34/64), and 79.7% (51/64), respectively. Liver involvement is an independent risk factor for poor efficacy of humanized CD25 monoclonal antibody for SR-aGVHD at day 28 (OR=9.588, 95% CI 0.004-0.291, P=0.002). The median follow-up time for all patients was 17.1 (0.2-50.8) months from the start of humanized CD25 monoclonal antibody therapy. The 1- and 2-year OS rates were 63.2% (95% CI 57.1% -69.3%) and 52.6% (95% CI 46.1% -59.1%), respectively. The 1- and 2-year DFS rates were 58.4% (95% CI 52.1% -64.7%) and 49.8% (95% CI 43.4% -56.2%), respectively. The 1- and 2-year NRM rates were 28.8% (95% CI 23.1% -34.5%) and 32.9% (95% CI 26.8% -39.0%), respectively. The results of the multifactorial analysis showed that liver involvement (OR=0.308, 95% CI 0.108-0.876, P=0.027) and GVHD grade Ⅲ/Ⅳ (OR=9.438, 95% CI 1.211-73.577, P=0.032) were independent risk factors for OS. Conclusion: Humanized CD25 monoclonal antibody has good efficacy and safety for SR-aGVHD. This study shows that SR-aGVHD with pretreatment grade Ⅲ/Ⅳ GVHD and GVHD involving the liver has poor efficacy and prognosis and requires early intervention.

Phage antibody library technology in tumor therapy: a review / 生物工程学报

Tumor is a serious threat to human health. At present, surgical resection, chemoradiotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy are the main therapeutic strategies. Monoclonal antibody has gradually become an indispensable drug type in the clinical treatment of cancer due to its high efficiency and low toxicity. Phage antibody library technology (PALT) is a novel monoclonal antibody preparation technique. The recombinant immunoglobulin variable region of heavy chain (VH)/variable region of light chain (VL) gene is integrated into the phage vector, and the antibody is expressed on the phage surface in the form of fusion protein to obtain a diverse antibody library. Through the process of adsorption-elution-amplification, the antibody library can be screened to obtain the antibody molecule with specific binding antigen as well as its gene sequence. PALT has the advantages of short antibody production cycle, strong plasticity of antibody structure, large antibody yield, high diversity and direct production of humanized antibodies. It has been used in screening tumor markers and preparation of antibody drugs for breast cancer, gastric cancer, lung cancer and liver cancer. This article reviews the recent progress and the application of PALT in tumor therapy.

Expert consensus on the clinical application of antibody drug conjugates in the treatment of malignant tumors (2023 edition) / 中华肿瘤杂志

Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are a class of targeted biological agents that link cytotoxic drugs to monoclonal antibodies through linkers. The monoclonal antibody targets tumor cells and transports small-molecule cytotoxic drugs for specific delivery and minimal off-target side effects. September 30, 2022, 14 anti-tumor ADC drugs have been approved for marketing in the world, and four ADCs have been approved in China. With the improvement of the clinical accessibility of ADC drugs, clinicians urgently need to understand the molecular characteristics and mechanisms of ADCs, and clarify the indications for rational use of drugs. Patients' survival mainly depends on the appropriate dose and course of treatment and also on proper management of adverse reactions. In view of this, on the basis of the "Expert Consensus on the Clinical Application of Antibody-drug Conjugates for the Treatment of Malignant Tumors (2020 edition)" , Professional Committee on Clinical Research of Oncology Drugs, Chinese Anti-Cancer Association fully combines the existing clinical research evidence and the feasibility of current ADC drugs in China to update the consensus content. This consensus aims to provide a systematic overview of ADC drugs, so as to provide practical and effective suggestions and references for clinicians to apply and manage ADC drugs more accurately.

The Efficacy and Safety of Daratumumab-Based Regimen in Treatment of Multiple Myeloma Patients with Renal Impairment / 中国实验血液学杂志

OBJECTIVE@#To investigate the efficacy and safety of daratumumab in treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) patients with renal impairment (RI).@*METHODS@#The clinical data of 15 MM patients with RI who received daratumumab-based regimen from January 2021 to March 2022 in three centers were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were treated with daratumumab or daratumumab combined with dexamethasone or daratumumab combined with bortezomib and dexamethasone and the curative effect and survival were analyzed.@*RESULTS@#The median age of 15 patients was 64 (ranged 54-82) years old. Six patients were IgG-MM, 2 were IgA-MM,1 was IgD-MM and 6 were light chain MM. Median estinated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was 22.48 ml/(min·1.73 M2). Overall response rate of 11 patients with MM was 91% (≥MR), including 1 case of stringent complete response (sCR), 2 cases of very good partial response (VGPR), 3 cases of partial response (PR) and 4 cases of minor response (MR). The rate of renal response was 60%(9/15), including 4 cases of complete response (CR), 1 case of PR and 4 cases of MR. A median time of optimal renal response was 21 (ranged 7-56) days. With a median follow-up of 3 months, the median progression-free survival and overall survival of all patients were not reached. After treatment with daratumumab-based regimen, grade 1-2 neutropenia was the most common hematological adverse reaction. Non-hematological adverse reactions were mainly infusion-related adverse reactions and infections.@*CONCLUSION@#Daratumumab-based regimens have good short-term efficacy and safety in the treatment of multiple myeloma patients with renal impairment.

A real world study of anti-IgE monoclonal antibody in the treatment of allergic united airway disease / 中华预防医学杂志

Objective: To investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of anti-IgE monoclonal antibody (omazumab) in the treatment of allergic united airway disease (UAD) in the real-wold. Methods: Retrospective cohort study summarizes the case data of patients with allergic united airway disease who were treated with anti IgE monoclonal antibody (omalizumab) for more than 16 weeks from March 1, 2018 to June 30, 2022 in the Peking University First Hospital.The allergic UAD is defined as allergic asthma combined with allergic rhinitis (AA+AR) or allergic asthma combined with chronic sinusitis with nasal polyps (AA+CRSwNP) or allergic asthma combined with allergic rhinitis and nasal polyps (AA+AR+CRSwNP). The control of asthma was evaluated by asthma control test (ACT), lung function test and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO). The AR was assessed by total nasal symptom score (TNSS). The CRSwNP was evaluated by nasal visual analogue scale (n-VAS), sino-nasal outcome test-22 (SNOT-22), nasal polyps score (TPS) and Lund-Mackay sinus CT grading system. The global evaluation of omalizumab for the treatment of allergic UADwas performed by Global Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness(GETE).The drug-related side effects were also recorded. Matched t test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used to compare the score changes of IgE monoclonal antibody (omazumab) before and after treatment, and multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine the influencing factors of IgE monoclonal antibody (omazumab) response. Results: A total of 117 patients with UAD were enrolled, ranging in age from 19 to 77 years; The median age of patients was 48.7 years; Among them, 60 were male, ranging from 19 to 77 years old, with a median age of 49.9 years; There were 57 females, ranging from 19 to 68 years old, with a median age of 47.2 years. There were 32 cases in AA+AR subgroup, 59 cases in AA+CRSwNP subgroup, and 26 cases in AA+AR+CRSwNP subgroup. The total serum IgE level was 190.5 (103.8,391.3) IU/ml. The treatment course of anti IgE monoclonal antibody was 24 (16, 32) weeks. Compared with pre-treatment, omalizumab increased ACT from 20.0 (19.5,22.0) to 24.0 (23.0,25.0) (Z=-8.537, P<0.001), increased pre-bronchodilator FEV1 from 90.2 (74.8,103.0)% predicted value to 95.4 (83.2,106.0)% predicted value (Z=-5.315,P<0.001), increased FEV1/FVC from 80.20 (66.83,88.38)% to 82.72 (71.26,92.25)% (Z=-4.483,P<0.001), decreased FeNO from(49.1±24.8) ppb to (32.8±24.4) ppb (t=5.235, P<0.001), decreased TNSS from (6.5±2.6)to (2.4±1.9) (t=14.171, P<0.001), decreased n-VAS from (6.8±1.2) to (3.4±2.0)(t=14.448, P<0.001), decreased SNOT-22 from (40.0±7.9) to (21.3±10.2)(t=15.360, P<0.001), decreased TPS from (4.1±0.8) to (2.4±1.0)(t=14.718, P<0.001) and decreased Lund-Mackay CT score from (6.0±1.3) to (3.1±1.6)(t=17.012, P<0.001). The global response rate to omalizumab was 67.5%(79/117). The response rate in AA+AR (90.6%,29/32) was significantly higher than that in AA+CRSwNP (61.0%,36/59) and AA+AR+CRSwNP (53.8%,14/26) subgroups (χ2=11.144,P=0.004). Only 4 patients (3.4%,4/117) had mild side effects. Conclusion: The real-world study showed favorable effectiveness and safety of anti-IgE monoclonal antibody for treatment of allergic UAD. To provide basis for preventing the progress and precise treatment of allergic UAD.

Clinical analysis of immunotherapy rechallenge in advanced gastric cancer / 中华肿瘤杂志

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and influencing factors of programmed death protein 1 (PD-1) monoclonal antibody rechallenge therapy in advanced gastric cancer (GC). Methods: The clinical data of patients with advanced GC who were treated with anti-PD-1 rechallenge in Henan Cancer Hospital from January 2020 to December 2021 were collected retrospectively. The progression-free survival (PFS) was defined as the time from the first or second used of anti-PD-1 treatment to the date of disease progression or the last follow-up, named PFS(1) and PFS(2), respectively. Kaplan-Meier method and Log rank test were used for survival analysis, Cox proportional hazard model was used to analyze the influencing factors. Results: A total of 60 patients with anti-PD-1 rechallenge therapy were collected, the median follow-up time was 12.2 months. The median progression-free survival (PFS(2)) of anti-PD-1 rechallenge therapy was 2.9 months, the objective response rate (ORR) was 16.7%, and the disease control rate (DCR) was 55.0%. The median PFS(2) of the first and second anti-PD-1 identical and different rechallenge treatment was 3.5 months and 1.9 months (P=0.007) respectively. The median PFS(2) of positive PD-L1 expression in rechallenge therapy was 3.4 months, ORR was 22.7%, and DCR was 63.6%; the median PFS(2) was 4.5 months, ORR was 27.3%, and DCR was 54.5% in patients with median PFS(1)≥6 months. Multivariate analysis showed that peritoneal metastasis was independently associated with anti-PD-1 rechallenge therapy with PFS(2) (HR=2.327, 95% CI, 1.066-5.082, P=0.034). The incidence of adverse reactions in grade 1-2 and grade 3-4 of anti-PD-1 rechallenge therapy was 83.3%, and 35.0%, respectively, and the safety was controllable. Conclusion: Rechallenge therapy with anti-PD-1 is a feasible treatment in advanced GC, but the screening of suitable population for rechallenge therapy still needs prospective data analysis and verification.

Tratamientos y bioterapias para COVID-19 / Therapeutics and biotherapies for covid-19

INTRODUCCIÓN: Un nuevo brote de coronavirus surgió en 2019 en Wuhan, China, causando conmoción en el sistema sanitario de todo el mundo; el Comité Internacional de Taxonomía de Virus lo denominó SARS-CoV-2, agente causante de la enfermedad COVID-19.El espectro de gravedad de la enfermedad es muy amplio: la mayoría de los pacientes no presentan gravedad, pero otros pueden desarrollar neumonías, y la insuficiencia respiratoria aguda es la causa más frecuente de mortalidad. Objetivo: analizar y desarrollar las distintas alternativas terapéuticas aportadas por la Biotecnología para tratar los síntomas de aquellos pacientes con COVID-19. Metodología: se realizó una revisión de la bibliografía disponible, a partir de enero de 2020 en PubMed, acerca de los tratamientos que se encuentran aún en ensayos clínicos y aquellos que cuentan con aprobación bajo uso de emergencia para la enfermedad COVID-19. También se realizaron búsquedas a través de Google y Google Académico para publicaciones de organismos de Salud en referencia a políticas de salud establecidas para la terapéutica durante dicha pandemia. Resultados: este trabajo aborda las nuevas alternativas terapéuticas para COVID-19 derivadas de la Biotecnología, que se encuentran tanto en uso como en etapas de ensayos clínicos comprendidos dentro del segmento de los biofármacos y las bioterapias. Se incluye un breve resumen del estatus regulatorio de entidades de salud, el mecanismo de acción de dichas terapias y características generales de cada uno. Se incluyen novedosas bioterapias que se empezaron a implementar para afrontar la pandemia. Conclusiones: la pandemia de coronavirus está poniendo a prueba el sistema sanitario internacional, para brindar soluciones tanto desde el diagnóstico y prevención como para el tratamiento de la población a fin de disminuir la mortalidad. Esto incluyó, obviamente también, al área de la Biotecnología aplicada a la salud, que ha aportado en los tres aspectos mencionados; el presente trabajo se centra en las respuestas de tipo terapéutico que ha brindado y que están comercializadas o en fases clínicas. (AU)

INTRODUCTION: A new coronavirus outbreak emerged in 2019 in Wuhan, China, causing a shock to the healthcare system around the world; the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses named it SARS-CoV- 2, the infectious agent of the COVID-19 disease. The spectrum of severity of the disease is very wide, most patients are not serious, but others can develop pneumonia, with acute respiratory failure being the most frequent cause of mortality. Objective: to analyze and develop the different therapeutic alternatives provided by Biotechnology dedicated to Health, to treat the symptoms of those COVID-19 patients who require it, and thus reduce mortality.Methodology: a review of the available literature from January 2020 in PubMed of the treatments that are still in clinical trials and those that have been approved under emergency use for the disease COVID-19 was performed. Searches were also carried out through Google and Google Scholar for publications of Health organizations in reference to health policies established for therapeutics during the mentioned pandemic. Results: this work addresses the new therapeutic alternatives derived from Biotechnology, which are both in use and in stages of clinical trials, to treat patients who developed COVID-19 included within the segment of biopharmaceuticals and biotherapies. A brief summary of the regulatory status of health entities, the mechanism of action of said therapies and general characteristics of each one is included. Innovative biotherapies that began to be implemented to face the pandemic are included. Conclusions: The coronavirus pandemic has driven the international health system to the test, to provide solutions both from the diagnosis, prevention and treatment of the population to reduce the mortality of patients. This obviously also included the area of Biotechnology applied to health, which has contributed in the three aspects mentioned. The present work focuses on the therapeutic responses that it has provided and that are commercialized or in clinical phases. (AU)

Uso de anticorpos monoclonais por pacientes com covid-19 interfere na concentração sérica de angiotensina II? / Does the use of monoclonal drugs by patients with COVID-19 interfere with the serum concentration of angiotensin II? / ¿El uso de fármacos monoclonales por pacientes con COVID-19 interfiere con la concentración sérica de angiotensina II?

Introdução:uma vez conhecidos os mecanismos de patogênese do SARS-CoV-2, vários métodos de tratamento para a COVID-19 foram desenvolvidos, dentre eles destaca-se o uso dos anticorpos monoclonais para o contexto de pacientes em estágios graves da doença. Objetivo: compreender se o uso dos anticorpos monoclonais para tratamento da COVID-19 grave interfere nos níveis séricos da angiotensina II. Metodologia:Para a realização dessa pesquisa foram selecionados através do DeCS e MeSH os descritores "COVID-19", "Angiotensin II" e "Antibodies, Monoclonal" e seus respectivos "entry terms" sugeridos pela base MeSH. Posteriormente,utilizando-se os operadores booleanos OR e AND, foi montada uma estratégia de busca, a qual foi utilizada nas bases de dados PUBMED, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library e Scopus, sem restrição dedata de publicação ou idioma. Resultados:ao final do processo de seleção dos artigos, 29 foram selecionados para a leitura e análise completa. Nesta revisão, foram abordados diferentes tipos de anticorpos monoclonais, os quais foram oportunamente agrupados de acordo com o seu mecanismo de ação. Conclusão: foi possível concluir que das cinco classes de anticorpos monoclonais tratadas neste trabalho, três potencialmente podem causar alterações nos níveis séricos de angiotensina II (AU).

Introduction:once the mechanisms of pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 are known, several methods of treatment for COVID-19 have been developed, among them the use of monoclonal antibodies for the context of patients in severe stages of the disease. Purpose:to understand whether the use of monoclonal antibodies for the treatment of severe COVID-19 interferes with serum angiotensin II levels. Methodology:For this research were selected through DeCS and MeSH the descriptors "COVID-19", "Angiotensin II" and "Antibodies, Monoclonal" and their respective entry "Terms" suggested by the MeSH database. Subsequently, using the boolean operators OR and AND, a search strategy was set up, which was used in the databases PUBMED, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Scopus, without restriction of publication date or language. Results:at the end of the article selection process, 29 were selected for reading and full analysis. In this review, different types of monoclonal antibodies were addressed, which were opportunely grouped according to their mechanism of action. Conclusion:it was possible to conclude that of the five classes of monoclonal antibodies treated in this study, three potentially can cause changes in serum levels of angiotensin II (AU).

Introducción:Una vez conocidos los mecanismos de patogénesis del SARSCoV-2, se desarrollaron variosmétodos de tratamiento para el COVID-19, entre ellos, el uso de anticuerpos monoclonales para el contexto de pacientes en fases graves de la enfermedad. Objetivo:Comprender si el uso de anticuerpos monoclonales para el tratamiento de la COVID-19 grave interfiere en los niveles séricos de angiotensina II. Metodología:Los descriptores "COVID-19", "Angiotensina II", "Anticuerpos, Monoclonales" y sus respectivos "entry terms" (términos de entrada) sugeridos por el MeSH fueron seleccionados a través de DeCS yMeSH. Posteriormente, utilizando los operadores booleanos OR y AND, se estableció una estrategia de búsqueda que se utilizó en las bases de datos PUBMED, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library y Scopus, sin restricción de fecha de publicación ni de idioma. Resultados:Al final del proceso de selección de artículos, se seleccionaron 29 artículos para su lectura y análisis completos. En esta revisión se han abordado diferentes tipos de anticuerpos monoclonales, que se han agrupado oportunamente según su mecanismo de acción. Conclusión:Se pudo concluir que de las cinco clases de anticuerpos monoclonales tratados en este trabajo, tres pueden potencialmente causar alteraciones en los niveles séricos de angiotensina II (AU).

Linfomas no Hodgkin indolentes y terapia anti-CD20: una revisión de la literatura / Indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphomas and anti-CD20 therapy: a literature review

Introducción: Los linfomas no Hodgkin indolentes se destacan por el reto que suponen desde el punto de vista terapéutico. La introducción de la terapia con rituximab, un anticuerpo monoclonal que se une al antígeno CD20 de la membrana de los linfocitos B, revolucionó los tratamientos hasta ese momento y abrió el camino para el desarrollo de otros anticuerpos monoclonales anti-CD20. Objetivo: Describir las características generales de los linfomas no Hodgkin indolentes y de los anticuerpos monoclonales anti-CD20, así como el rol de la terapia anti-CD20 en dichas enfermedades. Métodos: Se realizó una revisión de la literatura publicada en los últimos 20 años, disponible en los repositorios: Scielo, Scopus, Pubmed/Medline, ScienceDirect y Mediagraphic. Se emplearon para elaborar este manuscrito 35 documentos, de ellos 80 por ciento correspondieron a los últimos 5 años. Conclusiones: La sólida evidencia científica, acumulada durante las últimas dos décadas, respalda el uso clínico de los anticuerpos monoclonales anti-CD20 en el tratamiento de los linfomas no Hodgkin indolentes. El uso efectivo de estos fármacos como agentes únicos o combinados con quimioterapia demuestran su versatilidad terapéutica(AU)

Introduction: Indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphomas are notable for the challenge they pose from a therapeutic point of view. The introduction of rituximab, a monoclonal antibody that binds to the CD20 antigen of the B-lymphocyte membrane, revolutionized treatments up to that time and opened the way for the development of other anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies. Objective: To describe the general characteristics of indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphomas and anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies, as well as the role of anti-CD20 therapy in these diseases. Methods: A review of the literature published in the last 20 years, available in the repositories: Scielo, Scopus, Pubmed/Medline, Science Direct and Mediagraphic, was performed. Thirty-five papers were used to prepare this manuscript, 80 percent of which corresponded to the last 5 years. Conclusions: Strong scientific evidence, accumulated over the last two decades, supports the clinical use of anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies in the treatment of indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. The effective use of these drugs as single agents or in combination with chemotherapy demonstrates their therapeutic versatility(AU)

Tixagevimab e cilgavimab (Evusheld) para el tratamiento de pacientes con COVID-19 / Tixagevimab and cilgavimab (Evusheld) for the treatment of patients with COVID-19

EFECTOS EN LA SALUD: Hasta el momento, no se encuentra publicada evidencia en seres humanos que permita evaluar la eficacia y seguridad de la combinación de tixagevimab y cilgavimab. Podría ser una combinación menos activa frente a las nuevas variantes del SARS-CoV-2. IMPLEMENTACIÓN: BARRERAS Y COSTO COMPARATIVO: La tecnología aún no está autorizada para su comercialización en Argentina. Su forma de administración dificultaría su implementación. Su costo comparativo por tratamiento sería elevado y no se conoce la disponibilidad del laboratorio para responder a la demanda sin afectar la equidad en la distribución. RECOMENDACIONES: Las guías de práctica clínica de alta calidad metodológica actualizadas no tienen una dirección clara en cuanto a la utilización rutinaria del tratamiento. Sugieren utilizar el tratamiento en casos especiales y en personas de alto riesgo muy seleccionadas para profilaxis previa a la exposición.

Tixagevimab e cilgavimab (Evusheld) para el tratamiento de pacientes con COVID-19 / Tixagevimab and cilgavimab (Evusheld) for the treatment of patients with COVID-19

INTRODUCCIÓN: Desarrollado por AstraZeneca, Evusheld es una combinación de dos anticuerpos monoclonales de acción prolongada que funcionan uniéndose a la proteína de pico en el exterior del virus SARS-CoV-2, el virus que causa el COVID-19. Esto, a su vez, evita que el virus se adhiera a las células humanas y entre en ellas. Evusheld se utiliza en pacientes antes de estar expuesto a la infección por COVID-19 para prevenir la enfermedad (lo que se conoce como "profilaxis previa a la exposición"), especialmente en adultos en quienes se considera poco probable que generen una respuesta inmunitaria a partir de la vacunación contra el COVID-19 o para quienes no se recomienda la vacunación.(13) Evusheld es una combinación de tixagevimab (AZD8895) y cilgavimab (AZD1061), derivados de células B donadas por pacientes convalecientes después del virus SARS-CoV-2. Los anticuerpos monoclonales humanos se unen a sitios distintos en la proteína de punta 2 del SARS-CoV-2, con una extensión de la vida media y una unión reducida al receptor Fc. La extensión de la vida media triplica aproximadamente la durabilidad de su acción en comparación con los anticuerpos convencionales y brindaría de seis a doce meses de protección contra COVID-19 luego de una sola administración. El tratamiento se está probando actualmente en varios ensayos de prevención y tratamiento de COVID19: ensayo de fase III PROVENT 8 de más de 5000 participantes en profilaxis previa a la exposición; TACKLE COVID-19 9. Ensayo de tratamiento de fase III en un entorno ambulatorio; y ensayos de tratamiento de colaboradores en entornos ambulatorios y hospitalizados. AZD7442 se está evaluando en las vías de administración IM e intravenosa. (17) Los hallazgos preliminares 'in vitro' de investigadores de la Universidad de Oxford y la Universidad de Columbia también demuestran que AZD7442 neutraliza las variantes virales emergentes recientes del SARS-CoV-2. (18­21) Luego de un parte de prensa en el que se informan los resultados preliminares del estudio STORM-CHASER y PROVENT, para su uso como profilaxis post-exposición y en personas ambulatorias, adultos de alto riesgo en los que resulte poco probable que desarrollen una inmunidad apropiada con la vacunación, su uso fue autorizado por las Agencias de Medicamentos del Reino Unido y los Estados Unidos.(17) La Administración de Drogas y Alimentos (FDA, su sigla del inglés Food and Drugs Administration) de los Estados Unidos emitió una autorización de uso de emergencia para Evusheld para la profilaxis previa a la exposición (prevención) de COVID-19 en personas mayores de 12 años de edad y que pesan al menos 40 kilogramos. (22) El producto solo está autorizado para aquellas personas que actualmente no están infectadas con el virus SARS-CoV-2 y que no han estado expuestas recientemente a una persona infectada con SARS-CoV-2. La autorización también requiere que las personas tengan: sistemas inmunitarios comprometidos de moderados a graves debido a una afección médica, o debido a la toma de medicamentos o tratamientos inmunosupresores, y es posible que no generen una respuesta inmunitaria adecuada a la vacunación contra el COVID-19 o; antecedentes de reacciones adversas graves a una vacuna contra el COVID-19 y/o sus componente. OBJETIVO: El objetivo del presente informe es evaluar parámetros de eficacia, seguridad, conveniencia y recomendaciones disponibles acerca del empleo de la combinación de tixagevimab y cilgavimab (Evusheld) para el tratamiento de pacientes con COVID-19 en Argentina. MÉTODOS: Teniendo en cuenta la velocidad con la que la información relacionada a la pandemia aparece y se modifica, se desarrolló un protocolo sustentado en proyectos que resume activamente la evidencia científica a medida que la misma se hace disponible. Con este fin se utilizó la plataforma L- ove de Epistemonikos https://app.iloveevidence.com/topics para identificar revisiones sistemáticas "vivas". Se seleccionaron aquellas con una calidad metodológica apropiada evaluada a través de la herramienta AMSTAR-2, y que a su vez llevaran un proceso de actualización frecuente. (23) De cada una de las revisiones sistemáticas identificadas se extractaron los efectos de la intervención sobre los desenlaces priorizados como importantes o críticos y la certeza en dichos efectos. Para la priorización de los desenlaces se adoptó una perspectiva desde el paciente considerando sus potenciales preferencias. La selección se realizó por consenso entre los autores y supervisores del informe considerando los resultados de múltiples ejercicios de priorización publicados, realizados en el marco del desarrollo de distintas guías de práctica clínica. Se seleccionaron "mortalidad", "ingreso en asistencia ventilatoria mecánica", "tiempo hasta resolución de síntomas", "hospitalización", "eventos adversos graves" como desenlaces críticos. Adicionalmente, se extractaron datos relacionados con efectos de subgrupo potencialmente relevantes para la toma de decisión, con especial énfasis en el tiempo de evolución, la severidad de la enfermedad y el estado de vacunación. En los casos en que no fue reportado por las revisiones sistemáticas incluidas, se calculó el efecto absoluto de las intervenciones en pacientes vacunados, tomando el riesgo basal reportado para pacientes no vacunados multiplicado por un riesgo relativo de 0,1 según el efecto de la vacunación observado en distintos estudios y sistemas de vigilancia. (8,10,24,25) Para confeccionar las conclusiones en el efecto de las intervenciones evaluadas sobre los desenlaces priorizados, utilizamos lineamientos publicados, específicamente desarrollados a tal fin. Este dominio contempla dos subdominios: la existencia de barreras y facilitadores en nuestro contexto para la implementación de la tecnología evaluada no consideradas en los otros dominios analizados, y los costos comparativos en relación con otras intervenciones similares. Con el objetivo de emitir un juicio de valor sobre la magnitud de dichos costos, en pacientes hospitalizados se utilizó como comparador al tratamiento con dexametasona, que ha demostrado ser una intervención accesible y de beneficios importantes en el contexto analizado. Para la identificación de recomendaciones sustentadas en evidencia y actualizadas, se utilizó la plataforma COVID recmap. Se seleccionaron aquellas guías con rigor metodológico apropiado según la herramienta AGREE II (> 70%) y se incorporaron sus recomendaciones al informe. RESULTADOS: No se identificaron revisiones sistemáticas que cumplieran con los criterios de inclusión del presente informe y reportaron resultados. El ensayo STORM CHASER, cuyos resultados preliminares fueron publicados en un parte de prensa por el laboratorio AstraZeneca, evaluó la seguridad y eficacia de AZD7442, una combinación de anticuerpos de acción prolongada, para la prevención de la COVID-19 sintomática en participantes expuestos recientemente al virus SARS-CoV-2. El ensayo no cumplió con el criterio principal de valoración de la prevención posterior a la exposición de la COVID-19 sintomática con AZD7442 en comparación con el placebo. Los participantes del ensayo eran adultos no vacunados de 18 años o más con exposición confirmada a una persona con un caso del virus SARS-CoV-2 en los últimos ocho días. Adicionalmente, existe información sobre la efectividad in vitro de tixagevimab/cilgavimab frente a las diferentes variantes de SARS-CoV-2. Esta información se encuentra disponible en OpenData Portal, que condensa la información de un conjunto priorizado de publicaciones (preprints y artículos revisados por pares). Los resultados muestran que la combinación de tixagevimab/cilgavimab podría ser menos activa frente a las nuevas variantes del SARS-CoV-2, incluida Omicrón y subvariantes (B.1.1.529; BA.1.1; BA.1; BA.1 [+Q493K]; BA.2; B.1.1.529 [+F694Y] en comparación de las variantes predominantes al momento de realizarse el estudio STORM-CHASER. CONCLUSIONES: El cuerpo de la evidencia (un estudio aún no publicado cuyos datos se encuentran parcialmente disponibles en un comunicado de prensa) muestra que tixagevimab/cilgavimab, podría tener un beneficio clínico pequeño en personas expuestas al SARS-COV-2 con factores de riesgo para progresar a enfermedad grave que no han sido vacunados y con riesgo de falla inmune. En esta población, podría disminuir el riesgo de infección. No se cuenta con datos de infección por nuevas variantes ni relacionados con otros desenlaces como la admisión hospitalaria, la necesidad de ventilación mecánica o la muerte. Esta tecnología tampoco ha sido probada en personas vacunadas ni en otros escenarios. La evidencia proveniente de estudios in vitro, nos muestra que podría no ser activa frente a las nuevas variantes del SARS-CoV-2, incluida Omicrón y sus sub-variantes en estudio. La tecnología no está autorizada para su comercialización por la Administración Nacional de Medicamentos, Alimentos y Tecnología Médica de nuestro país. La forma de administración y el costo comparativo estimado es elevado podrían constituir barreras para su uso. Las guías de práctica clínica de alta calidad metodológica actualizadas no tienen una dirección clara en cuanto a la utilización rutinaria del tratamiento y sugieren utilizar el tratamiento en casos muy especiales en personas de alto riesgo muy seleccionadas para profilaxis previa a la exposición.

Eficacia y seguridad de la combinación de tixagevimab y cilgavimab (Evusheld) contra la COVID-19 / Efficacy and safety of the combination of tixagevimab and cilgavimab (Evusheld) against COVID-19

ANTECEDENTES: Este informe se efectúa en atención a la solicitud la jefatura del Instituto Nacional de Salud (INS). El 8 de diciembre de 2021, la FDA emitió la autorización de uso de emergencia de la combinación de anticuerpos monoclonales tixagevimab y cilgavimab (Evusheld) como profilaxis pre exposición (prevención) en cierta población de adultos y niños (personas inmunocomprometidas y antecedentes de reacciones adversas severas a las vacunas contra COVID-19) (1). La EMA continua con el proceso de revisión de la eficacia y seguridad (2). El objetivo es sintetizar la evidencia científica publicada respecto a la eficacia y seguridad de la combinación de tixagevimab y cilgavimab (EvusheldTM) contra la COVID-19. MÉTODOS: Pregunta PICO: ¿En población con COVID-19, cuál es la eficacia y seguridad de la combinación de de tixagevimab y cilgavimab (Evusheld)? Criterios de elegibilidad: Los criterios de selección de los estudios fueron los siguientes: Ensayos clínicos aleatorizados o revisiones sistemáticas que reporten resultados para al menos uno de los desenlaces. En ausencia de resultados de eficacia para alguno de los desenlaces, se considerará los resultados de efectividad a partir de estudios de cohorte o test negativo. Estudios publicados en idioma inglés y español. Se excluyeron cartas al editor, revisiones narrativas, estudios preclínicos (estudios in vitro o en modelos animales), artículos de opinión y manuscritos no revisados por pares. Métodos para la búsqueda e identificación de la evidencia: Los ensayos clínicos fueron identificados desde las siguientes fuentes (búsqueda realizada el 3 de febrero de 2022): Plataforma Living Overview of the Evidence (L·OVE) de la Fundación Epistemonikos (https://www.epistemonikos.org/en/). Bases de datos electrónicas: MEDLINE/Pubmed, Embase y Cochrane Library. Registro de Ensayos Clínicos de Estados Unidos (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/home) y la Plataforma Internacional de Registro de Ensayos Clínicos de la OMS (https://trialsearch.who.int/). Páginas institucionales de la Food and Drug Administration (FDA) de Estados Unidos (https://www.fda.gov/) y la European Medicines Agency (EMA) (https://www.ema.europa.eu/en). RESULTADOS: No se encontraron ECA o RS en las bases de datos seleccionadas que muestren resultados de eficacia o seguridad de la combinación de tixagevimab y cilgavimab (Evusheld). En cambio, se encontraron 8 protocolos de ECA que están en progreso. CONCLUSIONES: La presente nota técnica tiene como objetivo sintetizar la evidencia disponible sobre la eficacia y seguridad de la combinación de tixagevimab y cilgavimab (Evusheld) para la prevención de la infección por SARS-CoV-2. En la búsqueda de información, no se encontraron ECA o RS publicados en revistas científicas que mostraran información sobre la eficacia y seguridad de la combinación de tixagevimab y cilgavimab (Evusheld). En cambio, se encontró una revisión de la FDA de la ECA PROVENT que evaluó la eficacia y seguridad de la combinación de tixagevimab y cilgavimab (Evusheld). La combinación de tixagevimab y cilgavimab (Evusheld) fue evaluada en población que fue candidata a inmunización pasiva con anticuerpos, en este grupo se incluyeron las personas que tuvieron una respuesta deficiente a vacunas o personas con riesgo incrementado a infección por SARS-CoV-2. Según el informe, combinación de tixagevimab y cilgavimab (Evusheld) mostró una reducción del riesgo relativo en la infección sintomática por SARS-CoV-2 (confirmado por RT-PCR) de 76.7%. La combinación de tixagevimab y cilgavimab (Evusheld) mostró una reducción del riesgo relativo de muerte por cualquier causa de 68.8%. Se ha reportado eventos adversos asociados a tratamiento en el grupo intervención (8%) y en el grupo placebo (7%). Se ha reportado eventos adversos con desenlace de muerte en el grupo AZD7442 (0.12%) y placebo (0.23%), los detalles de estos desenlaces no están disponibles en el reporte. Los eventos adversos de especial interés fueron reportados en el grupo AZD7442 (3%) y en el grupo placebo (2%).

Efficacy and safety of daratumumab in the treatment of advanced light chain amyloidosis / 中华血液学杂志

Objective: The study investigated the efficacy and safety of daratumumab in the treatment of cardiac light chain (AL) amyloidosis. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical characteristics, hematologic response, organ response, long-term survival, and adverse events of 20 patients with newly diagnosed or relapsed/refractory cardiac AL amyloidosis treated with daratumumab in Peking Union Medical College Hospitalo from January 2017 to March 2021. Results: The overall median age of 20 patients was 62 (range, 45-73) yeas, with a male to female ratio of 2.3:1. Nine patients were newly diagnosed, while 11 patients had relapsed or refractory disease. Based on Mayo 2004 cardiac AL staging system, stages Ⅱ and Ⅲ diseases were present in 20 patients respectively. Four patients died during the first cycle of daratumumab, and the remaining 16 patients completed a median of 3 (range, 1-10) cycles of treatment. Overall hematologic response rates were 80% each at 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment initiation, and 45% , 60% , and 60% of the patients achieved at least a very good partial response at 1, 3, and 6 months respectively. The median duration to hematologic response was 13 (range, 6-28) days. At 3, 6, and 12 months, 20% , 30% , and 40% of the patients respectively achieved a cardiac response, and the median days to response was 91 (range, 30-216) days. As of the last follow-up, 9 (45% ) patients died. The 1-month mortality rate of all the patients and stage IIIb patients was 25% and 40% , respectively. The 1-year overall survival rate was 48.4% . Lymphocytopenia was the most common hematological adverse event (above grade 3) . Non-hematological adverse events were mainly infusion-related reactions and infections. Conclusion: Daratumumab could induce deep and rapid hematologic response in newly diagnosed and previously treated cardiac AL amyloidosis patients. However, daratumumab was not effective in preventing the high and early mortality rate in stage Ⅲb patients.

Current Progress and Future Developments of Antibody Drug Conjugates in Lung Cancer / 中国肺癌杂志

Antibody drug conjugates (ADCs) are a novel class of anti-cancer drugs, which combined the specificity of monoclonal antibodies with the cytotoxic palyload via the linkers. Many ADCs have not only verified impressive activity in a variety of cancers, including breast cancer and hematological system tumors, but also in lung cancer. The aim of this study was to provide informations for practice by summarizing the mechanism of action, clinical application and problems and challenges of ADCs.
.

Research Progress of Antibody-drug Conjugates in Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer / 中国肺癌杂志

Lung cancer is one of the malignant tumors with the highest morbidity and mortality in the world. Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is one of the most important pathological types of lung cancer. The prognosis of advanced NSCLC is poor and medical treatment is still the main treatment option. Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are the kind of potentially new anti-tumor drugs, consisting of monoclonal antibodies conjugated to the cytotoxic payloads via the synthetic linkers. They have a broad application prospect in solid tumors such as lung cancer. This article focuses on the mechanism of action and research progress of ADCs in advanced NSCLC.
.

A broadly neutralizing human monoclonal antibody against the hemagglutinin of avian influenza virus H7N9 / 中华医学杂志(英文版)

BACKGROUND@#The new emerging avian influenza A H7N9 virus, causing severe human infection with a mortality rate of around 41%. This study aims to provide a novel treatment option for the prevention and control of H7N9.@*METHODS@#H7 hemagglutinin (HA)-specific B cells were isolated from peripheral blood plasma cells of the patients previously infected by H7N9 in Jiangsu Province, China. The human monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) were generated by amplification and cloning of these HA-specific B cells. First, all human mAbs were screened for binding activity by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Then, those mAbs, exhibiting potent affinity to recognize H7 HAs were further evaluated by hemagglutination-inhibiting (HAI) and microneutralization in vitro assays. Finally, the lead mAb candidate was selected and tested against the lethal challenge of the H7N9 virus using murine models.@*RESULTS@#The mAb 6-137 was able to recognize a panel of H7 HAs with high affinity but not HA of other subtypes, including H1N1 and H3N2. The mAb 6-137 can efficiently inhibit the HA activity in the inactivated H7N9 virus and neutralize 100 tissue culture infectious dose 50 (TCID50) of H7N9 virus (influenza A/Nanjing/1/2013) in vitro, with neutralizing activity as low as 78 ng/mL. In addition, the mAb 6-137 protected the mice against the lethal challenge of H7N9 prophylactically and therapeutically.@*CONCLUSION@#The mAb 6-137 could be an effective antibody as a prophylactic or therapeutic biological treatment for the H7N9 exposure or infection.

Assistência Farmacêutica a Pacientes Oncológicos em Uso de Anticorpos Monoclonais em um Hospital de Referência do Oeste de Santa Catarina / Pharmaceutical Assistance to Oncological Patients Using Monoclonal Antibodies in a Reference Hospital in the west of Santa Catarina / Asistencia Farmacéutica a Pacientes Oncológicos que Utilizan Anticuerpos Monoclonales en un Hospital de Referencia en el Oeste de Santa Catarina

Introdução: A utilização dos anticorpos monoclonais vem sendo incorporada aos protocolos de tratamento para câncer, uma vez comprovada sua eficácia. Essa modalidade de terapia é onerosa, e sua aquisição ainda constitui um obstáculo para o paciente. Objetivo: Descrever a utilização de anticorpos monoclonais no que tange à forma de aquisição, regulação e judicialização, efeitos adversos e causas de interrupção da terapia. Método: Estudo descritivo com avaliação de pacientes (n=169) em tratamento para câncer, em um hospital público, no período de 1 de agosto de 2017 a 31 de julho de 2019. Resultados: A população estudada foi majoritariamente feminina (n=115). As principais neoplasias encontradas foram de mama (n=64, 36,16%), linfomas (n=53, 29,94%) e mieloma múltiplo de plasmócito/plasmocitoma (n=25, 14,12%). Os anticorpos monoclonais mais utilizados foram o trastuzumabe (n=65, 35,71%) e rituximabe (n=54, 29,67%). Foram observadas quatro formas de aquisição dos fármacos. As aquisições por meio do Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS) (n=103, 56,59%) e judicial (n=72, 39,56%) prevaleceram. A maioria dos pacientes não apresentou efeitos adversos à terapia (60,3%); mas, entre os que apresentaram, os principais efeitos foram vômitos e náuseas, astenia, diarreia, dor, neutropenia e mucosite. Efeitos adversos/toxicidade (n=15), falta de medicamento (n=11) e atraso na liberação (n=10) foram as causas mais comuns de interrupção do tratamento. Conclusão: Os anticorpos monoclonais são mais específicos e apresentam menores efeitos. Aos fármacos indisponíveis pelo SUS, a judicialização mostra-se como uma ferramenta importante

Introduction: The use of monoclonal antibodies has been incorporated into cancer treatment protocols, once their effectiveness has been proven. This type of therapy is costly and its acquisition is still an obstacle for the patient. Objective: To describe the use of monoclonal antibodies in the perspective of purchasing, regulation and judicialization, adverse effects and causes of therapy discontinuation. Method: Descriptive study evaluating patients (n=169) undergoing treatment for cancer in a public hospital, from August 1, 2017 to July 31, 2019. Results: The population investigated consisted mostly of females (n=115). The main neoplasms found were breast (n=64, 36.16%), lymphomas (n=53, 29.94%) and plasma cell/plasmacytoma multiple myeloma (n=25, 14.12%). The most used monoclonal antibodies were trastuzumab (n=65, 35.71%) and rituximab (n=54, 29.67%). Four forms of drug purchase were observed. The purchases through the National Health System (SUS) (n=103, 56.59%) and law-mandated (n=72, 39.56%) prevailed. Most patients had no therapy-related adverse effects (60.3%), but among those who did, the main effects were vomiting and nausea, asthenia, diarrhea, pain, neutropenia and mucositis. Adverse effects/toxicity (n=15), lack of medication (n=11) and delayed approval (n=10) were the most common causes of treatment discontinuation. Conclusion: Monoclonal antibodies are more specific and have lesser effects. For drugs unavailable at SUS, judicialization is an important tool

Introducción: El uso de anticuerpos monoclonales se ha incorporado a los protocolos de tratamiento del cáncer, una vez comprobada su eficacia. Este tipo de terapia es costosa y su adquisición sigue siendo un obstáculo para el paciente. Objetivo: Describir el uso de anticuerpos monoclonales en términos de adquisición, regulación y judicialización, efectos adversos y causas de interrupción de la terapia. Método: Estudio descriptivo que evaluó a pacientes (n=169) en tratamiento por cáncer, en un hospital público, desde el 1 de agosto de 2017 al 31 de julio de 2019. Resultados: La población estudiada fue mayoritariamente femenina (n=115). Las principales neoplasias encontradas fueron mama (n=64, 36,16%), linfomas (n=53, 29,94%) y mieloma múltiple de células plasmáticas/plasmocitomas (n=25, 14,16%). Los anticuerpos monoclonales más utilizados fueron trastuzumab (n=65, 35,71%) y rituximab (n=54, 29,67%). Se observaron cuatro formas de adquisición de fármacos. Predominaron las adquisiciones a través del Sistema Único de Salud (SUS) (n=103, 56,59%) y judiciales (n=72, 39,56%). La mayoría de los pacientes no presentaron efectos adversos a la terapia (60,3%), pero entre los que sí los tuvieron, los principales efectos fueron vómitos y náuseas, astenia, diarrea, dolor, neutropenia y mucositis. Los efectos adversos/toxicidad (n=15), la falta de medicación (n=11) y la liberación retardada (n=10) fueron las causas más frecuentes de interrupción del tratamiento. Conclusión: Los anticuerpos monoclonales son más específicos y tienen menos efectos. Para los medicamentos no disponibles en el SUS, la judicialización es una herramienta importante