Predictors of treatment response in a lupus nephritis population: lessons from the Aspreva Lupus Management Study (ALMS) trial.

OBJECTIVES: To identify predictors of overall lupus and lupus nephritis (LN) responses in patients with LN. METHODS: Data from the Aspreva Lupus Management Study (ALMS) trial cohort was used to identify baseline predictors of response at 6 months. Endpoints were major clinical response (MCR), improvement, complete renal response (CRR) and partial renal response (PRR). Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions with least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and cross-validation in randomly split samples were utilised. Predictors were ranked by the percentage of times selected by LASSO and prediction performance was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristics (AUROC) curve. RESULTS: We studied 370 patients in the ALMS induction trial. Improvement at 6 months was associated with older age (OR=1.03 (95% CI: 1.01 to 1.05) per year), normal haemoglobin (1.85 (1.16 to 2.95) vs low haemoglobin), active lupus (British Isles Lupus Assessment Group A or B) in haematological and mucocutaneous domains (0.61 (0.39 to 0.97) and 0.50 (0.31 to 0.81)), baseline damage (SDI>1 vs =0) (0.38 (0.16 to 0.91)) and 24-hour urine protein (0.63 (0.50 to 0.80)). LN duration 2-4 years (0.43 (0.19 to 0.97) vs <1 year) and 24-hour urine protein (0.63 (0.45 to 0.89)) were negative predictors of CRR. LN duration 2-4 years (0.45 (0.24 to 0.83) vs <1 year) negatively predicted PRR. The AUROCs of models for improvement, CRR and PRR were 0.56, 0.55 and 0.51 respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline variables predicted 6-month outcomes in patients with SLE. While the modest performance of models emphasises the need for new biomarkers to advance this field, the factors identified can help identify those patients who may require novel treatment strategies.

Reasons for Biologic and Targeted Synthetic Disease-modifying Antirheumatic Drug Cessation and Persistence of Second-line Treatment in a Rheumatoid Arthritis Dataset.

OBJECTIVE: To provide real-world evidence about the reasons why Australian rheumatologists cease biologic (b) and targeted synthetic (ts) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) when treating patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and to assess (1) the primary failure rate for first-line treatment, and (2) the persistence on second-line treatments in patients who stopped first-line tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi). METHODS: This is a multicenter retrospective, noninterventional study of patients with RA enrolled in the Australian Optimising Patient outcome in Australian RheumatoLogy (OPAL) dataset with a start date of b/tsDMARD between August 1, 2010, and June 30, 2017. Primary failure was defined as stopping treatment within 6 months of treatment initiation. RESULTS: Data from 7740 patients were analyzed; 6914 patients received first-line b/tsDMARD. First-line treatment was stopped in 3383 (49%) patients; 1263 (37%) were classified as primary failures. The most common reason was "lack of efficacy" (947/2656, 36%). Of the patients who stopped first-line TNFi, 43% (1111/2560) received second-line TNFi, which resulted in the shortest median time to stopping second-line treatment (11 months, 95% CI 9-12) compared with non-TNFi. The longest second-line median treatment duration after first-line TNFi was for patients receiving rituximab (39 months, 95% CI 27-74). CONCLUSION: A large proportion of patients who stopped first-line TNFi therapy received another TNFi despite evidence for longer treatment persistence on second-line b/tsDMARD with a different mode of action. Lack of efficacy was recorded as the most common reason for making a switch in first-line treatment of patients with RA.

Results From the First Multicenter, Open-label, Phase IIIb Study Investigating the Combination of Pertuzumab With Subcutaneous Trastuzumab and a Taxane in Patients With HER2-positive Metastatic Breast Cancer (SAPPHIRE).

INTRODUCTION: The primary objective of this study was to assess the safety and tolerability of combination pertuzumab, subcutaneous trastuzumab (Herceptin), and investigator's choice of taxane chemotherapy in previously untreated patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Efficacy was a secondary objective. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study was an open-label, non-randomized study of patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer who had no previous systemic non-hormonal anti-cancer therapy for metastatic disease. The primary endpoints included adverse events (AE), serious AEs, and cardiac AEs. Secondary endpoints included overall response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival. Patients were treated with pertuzumab and subcutaneous trastuzumab in 3-weekly cycles with taxane chemotherapy until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent and followed for a minimum of 24 months from initiation of study treatment. RESULTS: Fifty patients were enrolled and included in the analysis. All patients experienced at least 1 AE, with diarrhea, fatigue, peripheral neuropathy, alopecia, rash, and nausea the most common. Three patients experienced at least 1 grade 3 event of suspected cardiac origin (cardiac failure, cardiomyopathy, hypertension). Six patients withdrew from therapy owing to AEs (cardiac failure, drug hypersensitivity, decreased left ventricular ejection fraction, syncope, and bullous dermatitis). Taxane chemotherapy comprised nab-paclitaxel (74.0% of patients), docetaxel (28.0%), or paclitaxel (4.0%). The overall response rate was 73.3% (95% confidence interval, 58.1%-85.4%), the median progression-free survival was 17.0 months (95% confidence interval, 12.5-31.2 months), and the median overall survival was not reached. CONCLUSIONS: Subcutaneous trastuzumab in this combination has an acceptable safety and tolerability profile, including cardiac safety profile. Safety and efficacy appear similar to previous studies of intravenous trastuzumab in this combination.

Safety and Efficacy of Bevacizumab Plus Standard-of-Care Treatment Beyond Disease Progression in Patients With Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: The AvaALL Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Bevacizumab treatment beyond progression has been investigated in breast and metastatic colorectal cancers. Avastin in All Lines Lung (AvaALL) is the first randomized phase 3 study of bevacizumab across multiple lines of treatment beyond progression in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of continuous bevacizumab treatment beyond first progression in NSCLC. Design, Setting, and Participants: AvaALL was a randomized, open-label, phase 3b trial, conducted from 2011 to 2015 in 123 centers worldwide. Patients with nonsquamous NSCLC previously treated with first-line bevacizumab plus platinum-doublet chemotherapy and at least 2 cycles of bevacizumab maintenance were randomized (1:1) at first progression to receive bevacizumab plus standard of care (SOC) or SOC alone. Interventions: Patients received bevacizumab (7.5 or 15 mg/kg intravenously every 21 days) and/or investigator's choice of SOC. For subsequent lines, patients treated with bevacizumab received SOC with or without bevacizumab; the SOC arm received SOC only. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes included progression-free survival from first to second (PFS2) and third progression (PFS3), time to second (TTP2) and third progression (TTP3), and safety. Results: Between June 2011 and January 2015, 485 patients (median age, 63.0 years [range, 26-84 years]; 293 [60.4%] male) were randomized. Median OS was not significantly longer with bevacizumab plus SOC vs SOC alone: 11.9 (90% CI, 10.2-13.7) vs 10.2 (90% CI, 8.6-11.9) months (hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 90% CI, 0.71-1.00; P = .104). Median PFS2 was numerically longer with bevacizumab plus SOC vs SOC alone: 5.5 (90% CI, 4.2-5.7) vs 4.0 (90% CI, 3.4-4.3) months (HR, 0.83; 90% CI, 0.70-0.98; P = .06). Median PFS3 appeared longer with bevacizumab plus SOC vs SOC alone: 4.0 (90% CI, 2.9-4.5) vs 2.6 (90% CI, 2.3-2.9) months (HR, 0.63; 90% CI, 0.49-0.83), as did TTP2 and TTP3. Grade 3/4 adverse events were more frequent with bevacizumab plus SOC (186 [76.5%]) vs SOC alone (140 [60.3%]). No new safety signals were observed. Conclusions and Relevance: The primary end point was not met; however, OS was underpowered according to initial statistical assumptions. Continued therapy beyond first progression led to improved PFS3 (but not PFS2), TTP2, and TTP3. Although a result with P = .06 for PFS2 would conventionally be considered significant at a specified 2-sided α of .10, in the absence of adjustments for multiplicity, this result could be a chance finding. No new safety signals were identified with bevacizumab treatment beyond progression. Trial Registration: clinicaltrialsregister.eu Identifier: 2010-022645-14; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01351415.

Effectiveness of biologics in Australian patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a large observational study: REAL.

BACKGROUND: The comparative effectiveness of biologic treatment regimens in a real world Australian population is unknown. AIM: To assess the effectiveness of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARD) as monotherapy or in combination with methotrexate and/or other conventional DMARD (cDMARD) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: A retrospective, non-interventional study was conducted that investigated the use of bDMARD in adult patients with RA in routine clinical practice. Data were extracted from the Optimising Patient Outcomes in Australian Rheumatology - Quality Use of Medicines Initiative database. Real-world effectiveness was measured using the 28-joint disease activity score (DAS28) and clinical disease activity index (CDAI) by treatment group at baseline, weeks 12 and 24. RESULTS: A total of 2970 patients was included with a median (min-max) age of 60.0 (19.0-94.0) years and median (min-max) duration of RA before first bDMARD treatment of 6.0 (0.2-58.3) years. A total of 1177 patients received more than one bDMARD during the analysis period of 1 January 1997 to 15 August 2015. Patients had 4922 treatment 'episodes' (defined as a cycle of continuous individual bDMARD prescribing in a single patient). Patients received a mean (SD) of 1.7 (1.0) episodes of treatment with median (min-max) treatment duration of 0.7 (0-11.8) years; median treatment duration was higher with the first treatment episode. bDMARD were most commonly initiated in combination with methotrexate (73.9% of episodes) and least commonly as monotherapy (9.9% of episodes). Median (min-max) baseline DAS28 decreased from 5.3 (0-8.7) with the first bDMARD to 3.7 (0-8.8) with the second. Median baseline CDAI similarly decreased. CONCLUSIONS: Patients tended to persist longer on their first bDMARD treatment. bDMARD as monotherapy or in combination appear to be accepted treatment strategies in the real world.

Tumor marker analyses from the phase III, placebo-controlled, FASTACT-2 study of intercalated erlotinib with gemcitabine/platinum in the first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The FASTACT-2 study of intercalated erlotinib with chemotherapy in Asian patients found that EGFR mutations were the main driver behind the significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit noted in the overall population. Further exploratory biomarker analyses were conducted to provide additional insight. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase III study investigated intercalated first-line erlotinib or placebo with gemcitabine/platinum, followed by maintenance erlotinib or placebo, for patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Provision of samples for biomarker analysis was encouraged but not mandatory. The following biomarkers were analyzed (in order of priority): EGFR mutation by cobas(®) test, KRAS mutation by cobas(®)KRAS test, HER2 by immunohistochemistry (IHC), HER3 by IHC, ERCC1 by IHC, EGFR gene copy number by fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) and EGFR by IHC. All subgroups were assessed for PFS (primary endpoint), overall survival (OS), non-progression rate and objective response rate. RESULTS: Overall, 256 patients provided samples for analysis. Considerable overlap was noted among biomarkers, except for EGFR and KRAS mutations, which are mutually exclusive. Other than EGFR mutations (p<0.0001), no other biomarkers were significantly predictive of outcomes in a treatment-by-biomarker interaction test, although ERCC1 IHC-positive status was predictive of improved OS for the erlotinib arm versus placebo in EGFR wild-type patients (median 18.4 vs 9.5 months; hazard ratio [HR] HR=0.32, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.14-0.69, p=0.0024). CONCLUSION: Activating EGFR mutations were predictive for improved treatment outcomes with a first-line intercalated regimen of chemotherapy and erlotinib in NSCLC. ERCC1 status may have some predictive value in EGFR wild-type disease, but requires further investigation.

Once-Monthly Continuous Erythropoietin Receptor Activator (C.E.R.A.) in Patients with Hemodialysis-Dependent Chronic Kidney Disease: Pooled Data from Phase III Trials.

INTRODUCTION: Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents and iron are commonly used in patients with chronic kidney disease with the aim of correcting anemia and maintaining stable hemoglobin levels. We analyzed pooled data from 13 studies with similar designs included in the Umbrella Continuous Erythropoietin Receptor Activator (C.E.R.A.) program to investigate the effects of continuous erythropoiesis receptor activator in clinically relevant subgroups of patients with chronic kidney disease and to determine whether the efficacy and safety outcomes demonstrated in the overall chronic kidney disease population are maintained in specific subgroups. METHODS: Data from 13 Phase III trials set up with similar design were retrospectively pooled for this analysis. Patients with chronic kidney disease who had previously been receiving epoetin or darbepoetin were switched to continuous erythropoiesis receptor activator once-monthly after a 4- to 8-week screening period. Patients entered a 16-week continuous erythropoiesis receptor activator dose-titration period followed by an 8-week evaluation period. In total, 2060 patients were included in the analysis. Subgroups were defined based on: hemoglobin target range [lower (10.0-12.0 g/dL)/upper (10.5-13.0 g/dL)], gender (female/male), age (<65/≥65), baseline N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels (<5000/≥5000), cardiovascular risk factors (diabetes/cardiac/vascular/none). RESULTS: Across all subgroups analyzed, switching from shorter-acting erythropoiesis-stimulating agents to continuous erythropoiesis receptor activator once-monthly maintained stable hemoglobin concentrations in a high proportion of patients (78%), with only moderate hemoglobin fluctuations and a low number of dose changes. The safety profile across subgroups was as expected based on pre-existing risk factors; observed increases in adverse events were attributable to underlying risk factors rather than study drug. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis of 13 trials showed that continuous erythropoiesis receptor activator once-monthly maintained stable hemoglobin levels across a number of clinically relevant patient subgroups, including those with higher inherent cardiovascular risk. The safety profile was consistent with that previously established in the chronic kidney disease population. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIERS: NCT00413894/NCT00545571/NCT00517413/NCT00560404/NCT00882713/NCT00550680/NCT00576303/NCT00660023/NCT00717821/NCT00642850/NCT00605293/NCT00661505/NCT00699348. FUNDING: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland.

Identification of clinical and serological factors during induction treatment of lupus nephritis that are associated with renal outcome.

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated with clinical outcome in patients with lupus nephritis. METHODS: Data from the Aspreva Lupus Management Study (ALMS) were analysed. Using multivariate analysis, we assessed the prognostic value of demographic, clinical, laboratory and histopathological features on the frequency of either complete remission (CR) or treatment failure (TF) during the maintenance phase. RESULTS: Among the 370 subjects who entered the trial (complete population), non-Hispanic ethnicity was associated with a higher likelihood of CR (OR=2.0). Several factors were independently associated with a greater likelihood of TF, including: (1) anti-double-stranded DNA (anti-dsDNA) at trial entry (OR=12.7), (2) failure to reduce anti-dsDNA within 8 weeks (OR=2.9) and (3) failure to reduce urine protein:creatinine ratio (UP/C) by ≥25% within 8 weeks (OR=2.6). Among the 227 subjects who entered the maintenance phase (maintenance population), baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥90 mL/min/1.73 m(2) was associated with a greater likelihood of CR (OR=2.0), and UP/C >1 at the end of induction was associated with a lower likelihood of CR (OR=0.3). Induction treatment with intravenous cyclophosphamide (IVC) was associated with a lower likelihood of TF (OR=0.5), while lack of treatment with antimalarials (OR=2.4), failure to reduce anti-dsDNA during the first 8 weeks of induction (OR=3.5), failure to reduce UP/C during the first 8 weeks of induction (OR=2.1) and anti-dsDNA positivity at the end of induction (OR=8.3) were independently associated with a greater likelihood of TF. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrates that levels of anti-dsDNA and UP/C during induction treatment are independently associated with renal outcome over the ensuing 3 years in both the complete and maintenance populations. Ethnicity is associated with renal outcome in just the complete population, and eGFR, induction treatment and treatment with antimalarials are associated with renal outcome in just the maintenance population.

Detection and Dynamic Changes of EGFR Mutations from Circulating Tumor DNA as a Predictor of Survival Outcomes in NSCLC Patients Treated with First-line Intercalated Erlotinib and Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: Blood-based circulating-free (cf) tumor DNA may be an alternative to tissue-based EGFR mutation testing in NSCLC. This exploratory analysis compares matched tumor and blood samples from the FASTACT-2 study. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients were randomized to receive six cycles of gemcitabine/platinum plus sequential erlotinib or placebo. EGFR mutation testing was performed using the cobas tissue test and the cobas blood test (in development). Blood samples at baseline, cycle 3, and progression were assessed for blood test detection rate, sensitivity, and specificity; concordance with matched tumor analysis (n = 238), and correlation with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Concordance between tissue and blood tests was 88%, with blood test sensitivity of 75% and a specificity of 96%. Median PFS was 13.1 versus 6.0 months for erlotinib and placebo, respectively, for those with baseline EGFR mut(+) cfDNA [HR, 0.22; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 0.14-0.33, P < 0.0001] and 6.2 versus 6.1 months, respectively, for the EGFR mut(-) cfDNA subgroup (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.65-1.04, P = 0.1076). For patients with EGFR mut(+) cfDNA at baseline, median PFS was 7.2 versus 12.0 months for cycle 3 EGFR mut(+) cfDNA versus cycle 3 EGFR mut(-) patients, respectively (HR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.21-0.48, P < 0.0001); median OS by cycle 3 status was 18.2 and 31.9 months, respectively (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.31-0.84, P = 0.0066). CONCLUSIONS: Blood-based EGFR mutation analysis is relatively sensitive and highly specific. Dynamic changes in cfDNA EGFR mutation status relative to baseline may predict clinical outcomes.

A multi-centre, single-arm, open-label study evaluating the safety and efficacy of fixed dose rituximab in patients with refractory, relapsed or chronic idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (R-ITP1000 study).

The efficacy of a fixed-dose rituximab schedule was prospectively explored in primary/acute refractory, relapsed or chronic (platelet count >10 × 10(9) /l and ≤50 × 10(9) /l) idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP). Patients received two doses of rituximab (1000 mg) on days 1 and 15 and were followed-up on weeks 1-8, 12, 26, 39 and 52. A total of 122 patients were included in the safety population; efficacy was analysed in 108 patients. Overall response rate (ORR) at week 8, defined as the proportion of patients achieving complete response (CR; platelet count >150 × 10(9) /l) or partial response (PR; platelet count >50 × 10(9) /l) was 44%. Therapeutic response, defined as achieving a response at week 8, with at least a minor response (MR; platelet count >30 × 10(9) /l), sustained up to weeks 26 and 52 and accompanied by a reduction in ITP medications, was achieved in 44% (week 26) and 35% (week 52) of patients, respectively. Treatment was well tolerated with no safety concerns. While this study failed to meet its primary endpoint of an ORR of 50%, the efficacy of two fixed doses of rituximab appear to provide similar efficacy to the standard 375 mg/m(2) four-dose schedule in relapsed/chronic ITP.

Intercalated combination of chemotherapy and erlotinib for patients with advanced stage non-small-cell lung cancer (FASTACT-2): a randomised, double-blind trial.

BACKGROUND: The results of FASTACT, a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study, showed that intercalated chemotherapy and erlotinib significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. We undertook FASTACT-2, a phase 3 study in a similar patient population. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, patients with untreated stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by use of an interactive internet response system with minimisation algorithm (stratified by disease stage, tumour histology, smoking status, and chemotherapy regimen) to receive six cycles of gemcitabine (1250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8, intravenously) plus platinum (carboplatin 5 × area under the curve or cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 1, intravenously) with intercalated erlotinib (150 mg/day on days 15-28, orally; chemotherapy plus erlotinib) or placebo orally (chemotherapy plus placebo) every 4 weeks. With the exception of an independent group responsible for monitoring data and safety monitoring board, everyone outside the interactive internet response system company was masked to treatment allocation. Patients continued to receive erlotinib or placebo until progression or unacceptable toxicity or death, and all patients in the placebo group were offered second-line erlotinib at the time of progression. The primary endpoint was PFS in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00883779. FINDINGS: From April 29, 2009, to Sept 9, 2010, 451 patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy plus erlotinib (n=226) or chemotherapy plus placebo (n=225). PFS was significantly prolonged with chemotherapy plus erlotinib versus chemotherapy plus placebo (median PFS 7·6 months [95% CI 7·2-8·3], vs 6·0 months [5·6-7·1], hazard ratio [HR] 0·57 [0·47-0·69]; p<0·0001). Median overall survival for patients in the chemotherapy plus erlotinib and chemotherapy plus placebo groups was 18·3 months (16·3-20·8) and 15·2 months (12·7-17·5), respectively (HR 0·79 [0·64-0·99]; p=0·0420). Treatment benefit was noted only in patients with an activating EGFR gene mutation (median PFS 16·8 months [12·9-20·4] vs 6·9 months [5·3-7·6], HR 0·25 [0·16-0·39]; p<0·0001; median overall survival 31·4 months [22·2-undefined], vs 20·6 months [14·2-26·9], HR 0·48 [0·27-0·84]; p=0·0092). Serious adverse events were reported by 76 (34%) of 222 patients in the chemotherapy plus placebo group and 69 (31%) of 226 in the chemotherapy plus erlotinib group. The most common grade 3 or greater adverse events were neutropenia (65 [29%] patients and 55 [25%], respectively), thrombocytopenia (32 [14%] and 31 [14%], respectively), and anaemia (26 [12%] and 21 [9%], respectively). INTERPRETATION: Intercalated chemotherapy and erlotinib is a viable first-line option for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer with EGFR mutation-positive disease or selected patients with unknown EGFR mutation status. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety of mycophenolate mofetil in combination with standard-dose or reduced-dose tacrolimus in liver transplant recipients.

The pharmacokinetics of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) in liver transplant recipients may change because of pharmacokinetic interactions with coadministered immunosuppressants or because changes in the enterohepatic anatomy may affect biotransformation of MMF to mycophenolic acid (MPA) and enterohepatic recirculation of MPA through the hydrolysis of mycophenolate acid glucuronide to MPA in the gut. In the latter case, the choice of formulation (oral versus intravenous) could have important clinical implications. We randomized liver transplant patients (n = 60) to standard (10-15 ng/mL) or reduced (5-8 ng/mL) trough levels of tacrolimus plus intravenous MMF followed by oral MMF (1 g twice daily) with corticosteroids. Pharmacokinetic sampling was performed after the last intravenous MMF dose, after the first oral MMF dose, and at selected times over 52 weeks. The efficacy and safety of the 2 regimens were also assessed. Twenty-eight and 27 patients in the tacrolimus standard-dose and reduced-dose groups, respectively, were evaluated. No significant differences between the tacrolimus standard-dose and reduced-dose groups were seen in dose-normalized MPA values of the time to the maximum plasma concentration (1.25 versus 1.28 hours), the maximum plasma concentration (15.5 +/- 7.93 versus 13.6 +/- 7.03 microg/mL), or the area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 hours (AUC(0-12); 53.0 +/- 20.6 versus 43.8 +/- 15.5 microg h/mL) at week 26 or at any other time point. No relationship was observed between the tacrolimus trough or AUC(0-12) and MPA AUC(0-12). Exposure to MPA after oral and intravenous administration was similar. Safety and efficacy were similar in the two treatment groups. In conclusion, exposure to MPA is not a function of exposure to tacrolimus. The similar safety and efficacy seen with MMF plus standard or reduced doses of tacrolimus suggest that MMF could be combined with reduced doses of tacrolimus.

A randomised, cross-over study comparing injection site pain with subcutaneous epoetin beta and subcutaneous darbepoetin alfa in patients with chronic kidney disease.

OBJECTIVE: To compare injection site pain of subcutaneous (sc) epoetin beta and darbepoetin alfa in adult patients with chronic kidney disease. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a multi-centre, randomised, two-arm, single-blind, cross-over study. Patients were randomised to receive weekly sc darbepoetin alfa 30 mug or weekly sc epoetin beta 6000 IU for 2 weeks and were then crossed over to the alternative treatment for 2 weeks. Injection site pain was assessed using a 10 cm ungraduated visual analogue scale (0 = no pain, 10 = worst pain) and a six-point verbal rating scale. Patient preference for treatment was also assessed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://clinicaltrials. gov/(NCT00377481). RESULTS: All randomised patients (N = 48) completed the study. The sample comprised 29 chronic kidney disease patients (Stage 3 or Stage 4), 11 peritoneal dialysis patients and 8 renal transplant patients. Patients perceived significantly less pain with epoetin beta than darbepoetin alfa, using the visual analogue scale (relative pain score = 2.75, darbepoetin alfa:epoetin beta, 95% CI: 1.85, 4.07; p < 0.0001) and the verbal rating scale (median: 0.5, 95% CI: 0.5, 1.0 vs. median: 1.5, 95% CI: 1.0, 2.0; p < 0.0001). Epoetin beta was preferred by significantly more patients (65%) than darbepoetin alfa (10%) (p < 0.001); 25% of patients reported no preference. CONCLUSIONS: Limitations included lack of an epoetin alfa comparator and limited blinding (patients were blinded to treatment, however, an unblinded nurse administered treatment). We show that sc injection of epoetin beta is significantly less painful than darbepoetin alfa and patient preference for epoetin beta confirms that the difference is clinically meaningful.

A randomized study to evaluate injection site reactions using three different enfuvirtide delivery mechanisms (the OPTIONS study).

BACKGROUND: The antiretroviral enfuvirtide (ENF) is injected subcutaneously using a 27-gauge needle. Injection site reactions (ISRs) can affect long-term ENF tolerability. Alternative ENF delivery methods may ameliorate ISRs. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, open-label, randomized controlled trial in which patients receiving ENF were randomized to continue receiving ENF by a 27-gauge needle, a shorter 31-gauge needle or a gas-powered, needle-free injection device (NFID). The primary study endpoint was the proportion of participants with < grade 2 ISR induration at week 12. RESULTS: Sixty patients received treatment and were included in the intention-to-treat population. The cohort was predominantly male (95%) with a mean age of 49.1 (SD +/- 7.7) years who had injected ENF for a mean of 821 (SD +/- 561) days. Response rates for ISR induration at week 12 were 38%, 25% and 42% for the 27-gauge, 31-gauge and NFID groups, respectively (all pairwise treatment comparison P-values > 0.2). There was no significant between-group difference for any ISR endpoint, except for changes in the composite ISR score (that is, no ongoing pain of > grade 1 or ISR for ongoing pain > or = grade 1 with induration ISR < grade 3 and for nodules < grade 2), which favoured the 27-gauge needle and NFID groups over the 31-gauge group (P = 0.012 and 0.047, respectively). Plasma HIV RNA load was unaffected. There were seven adverse events related to the delivery system: five attributed to the NFID. At week 12, 85% of participants elected to use the NFID. CONCLUSION: Needle-free ENF injection offers a reasonable, reliable alternative to needle-based injecting in this population, at least in the short term.