Biomedical subjects

Kate McKeage

Publications and source records attributed to Kate McKeage.

18 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Lubiprostone.

Lubiprostone (Amitiza) is an oral bicyclic fatty acid that selectively activates type 2 chloride channels in the apical membrane of the gastrointestinal epithelium, resulting in increased fluid secretion. In two pivotal, randomised, double-blind, multicentre phase III studies in patients with chronic idiopathic constipation, the frequency of spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs) was significantly greater in patients receiving lubiprostone 24microg twice daily than in those receiving placebo at each weekly timepoint throughout both 4-week studies (p < 0.05). At week 1 in one pivotal trial, the mean frequency of SBMs in the lubiprostone group was 5.9 per week compared with 4.0 per week in the placebo group (p < 0.0001) [baseline SBMs 1.3 and 1.5 per week]. Significantly greater improvements occurred with lubiprostone than placebo in the degree of straining, stool consistency and constipation severity (where reported) in both pivotal studies (p < 0.05 for all comparisons at all timepoints). Lubiprostone was generally well tolerated in clinical trials with no reports of treatment-related serious adverse events in pivotal trials. Nausea was the most common adverse event, occurring in up to 31% of patients receiving lubiprostone.

Adult↗

PubMed2006

Decitabine: in myelodysplastic syndromes.

Decitabine is a hypomethylating agent. Its action in DNA leads to the reactivation of tumour suppressor genes and the subsequent differentiation of cancer cells. In a randomised, phase III trial in patients (n = 170) with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), intravenous decitabine (45 mg/m(2)/day for 3 consecutive days every 6 weeks) combined with supportive care achieved a higher response rate (including eight complete and seven partial responses) than supportive care alone, which achieved no responses (17% vs 0%; p < 0.001). The median times to response and duration of response were 3.3 and 10.3 months in the phase III trial. In three phase II studies in patients (n = 29-87) with MDS treated with decitabine (40 or 50 mg/m(2)/day for 3 days every 5-6 weeks), the percentage of patients achieving a complete or partial response or an improvement ranged from 26% to 49%, and the median duration of response or improvement ranged from 4.9 to 8.3 months. The main adverse event associated with decitabine is myelosuppression.

Antimetabolites, Antineoplastic↗

PubMed2006

Intravenous droperidol: a review of its use in the management of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

Droperidol (Dehydrobenzperidol, Dehidrobenzoperidol, Dridol, Droleptan, Inapsine) is a dopamine D(2) receptor antagonist that has been widely used in adults and children for the prevention and treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) over several decades and, more recently, for the prevention of opioid-induced PONV during patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) in adults. In well controlled clinical trials of patients undergoing surgery, the efficacy of single-dose intravenous (IV) droperidol in preventing PONV was similar to that of ondansetron and dexamethasone. Droperidol significantly reduced opioid-induced PONV in adults during PCA and had a morphine-sparing effect. Droperidol is generally well tolerated and the incidence of adverse effects is similar to that observed with placebo and the serotonin 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists (setrons). Guidelines recommend that, in adults, droperidol monotherapy be considered for those at moderate risk of PONV, and droperidol in combination with a setron and/or dexamethasone be considered for patients at moderate or high risk of PONV. In children with moderate or high risk of PONV, droperidol is recommended for first-line use in some countries, and second-line use in others.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2005

Docetaxel in hormone-refractory metastatic prostate cancer.

The taxoid analogue docetaxel is a potent inhibitor of microtubular depolymerisation and, in hormone-refractory metastatic prostate cancer, it also counters the effects of the anti-apoptotic protein Bcl-2. Overall survival was significantly increased in patients with hormone-refractory metastatic prostate cancer receiving intravenous docetaxel every 3 weeks plus oral prednisone or estramustine, compared with patients receiving intravenous mitoxantrone every 3 weeks plus prednisone in two large phase III trials (TAX 327 and SWOG [Southwest Oncology Group] 9916). In the TAX 327 study, patients receiving docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks plus prednisone had a median overall survival duration of 18.9 months; in the SWOG 9916 study, median overall survival duration was 17.5 months with docetaxel 60 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks plus estramustine 280 mg three times daily on days 1-5. The median overall survival duration for the control arm of mitoxantrone 12 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks plus prednisone was 16-17 months. Compared with mitoxantrone plus prednisone, docetaxel plus prednisone improved prostate specific antigen response rate, pain and health-related quality of life, and docetaxel plus estramustine increased progression-free survival. Adverse events were more common with docetaxel- than mitoxantrone-based treatment regimens, but most events associated with docetaxel were mild-to-moderate in severity.

Antineoplastic Agents, Phytogenic↗

PubMed2004

Fulvestrant: a review of its use in hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer in postmenopausal women with disease progression following antiestrogen therapy.

Fulvestrant (Faslodex) is a novel estrogen receptor (ER) antagonist that competitively binds to the ER with a much greater affinity than that of tamoxifen. The downregulation of cellular levels of the ER protein results in complete abrogation of estrogen-sensitive gene transcription. This distinct mechanism of action ensures a lack of cross resistance with other hormonal agents and, in contrast to tamoxifen, fulvestrant has no known estrogen-agonist effects. Fulvestrant is administered via monthly intramuscular injections (250mg) and is recommended for the treatment of hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer in postmenopausal women with disease progression following antiestrogen therapy. The efficacy of fulvestrant was similar to that of the aromatase inhibitor anastrozole (1 mg/day) in two, well designed studies in postmenopausal women with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer that had progressed during prior antiestrogen therapy. Time to disease progression (primary endpoint) and treatment failure, rates of objective response and clinical benefit, overall survival and quality of life were similar in patients treated with fulvestrant or anastrozole. In retrospective noninferiority analyses, fulvestrant was at least as effective as anastrozole in all randomised patients, and in those with or without visceral metastases. Fulvestrant is generally well tolerated and was tolerated as well as anastrozole in clinical trials. Treatment-related adverse events were mostly mild to moderate and led to treatment withdrawal in about 1% of patients who received fulvestrant or anastrozole. The main adverse effects associated with therapy are nausea, asthenia, pain, vasodilation and headache.In conclusion, monthly intramuscular injections of fulvestrant are at least as effective and as well tolerated as oral anastrozole once daily in the treatment of postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer that has progressed on prior antiestrogen therapy. Because of a different mode of action to that of other hormonal agents, fulvestrant is effective in the treatment of tamoxifen-resistant disease and, unlike tamoxifen, has no known estrogen agonist effects. Thus, fulvestrant provides an effective and well tolerated option for the treatment of hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer in postmenopausal women with disease progression following antiestrogen therapy.

Anastrozole↗

PubMed2004

Manidipine: a review of its use in the management of hypertension.

Manidipine is a lipophilic, third-generation dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonist with a high degree of selectivity for the vasculature, thereby inducing marked peripheral vasodilation with negligible cardiodepression. In addition, manidipine does not significantly affect norepinephrine levels, suggesting a lack of sympathetic activation. It has a gradual onset of action and a long duration of action enabling once daily administration. Furthermore, manidipine dilates both the efferent and the afferent renal arterioles and appears to have beneficial renal effects unrelated to its antihypertensive effect. Once-daily oral manidipine is an effective and generally well tolerated antihypertensive agent for younger and elderly adult patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension. In particular, in a large double-blind trial, the incidence of ankle oedema was significantly lower in manidipine than in amlodipine recipients. Manidipine is also effective in hypertensive patients with comorbidities, such as type 2 diabetes mellitus and/or renal impairment, and appears to improve insulin sensitivity without affecting metabolic function. Thus, manidipine represents a first-line treatment option for patients with essential mild-to-moderate hypertension.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

Amisulpride: a review of its use in the management of schizophrenia.

Amisulpride (Solian), a substituted benzamide derivative, is a second-generation antipsychotic that preferentially binds to dopamine D2/D3 receptors in limbic rather than striatal structures. High dosages preferentially antagonise postsynaptic D2/D3 receptors, resulting in reduced dopamine transmission, and low dosages preferentially block presynaptic D2/D3 receptors, resulting in enhanced dopamine transmission. Amisulpride (200-1200 mg/day) was at least as effective as haloperidol and as effective as risperidone or olanzapine, in studies of up to 1 year in patients with schizophrenia manifesting predominantly positive symptoms. Amisulpride (50-300 mg/day) was significantly more effective than placebo in studies of up to 6 months in patients manifesting predominantly negative symptoms. Quality of life was also improved significantly more in patients receiving amisulpride than in those receiving haloperidol in 4- and 12-month studies in patients with predominantly mixed symptoms. Amisulpride was generally well tolerated in clinical trials. In patients with predominantly positive symptoms, amisulpride appeared to be better tolerated than haloperidol and was tolerated as well as risperidone and olanzapine. The incidence of extrapyramidal adverse effects with amisulpride was lower than with haloperidol but was generally similar to risperidone or olanzapine. Weight gain with amisulpride was less than that with risperidone or olanzapine and, unlike these agents, amisulpride does not seem to be associated with diabetogenic effects. Plasma prolactin levels are increased during amisulpride therapy and amenorrhoea occurs in about 4% of women. The incidence of adverse events with low dosages of amisulpride (< or = 300 mg/day) in patients with predominantly negative symptoms was similar to that observed with placebo. In conclusion, oral amisulpride (200-1200 mg/day) is at least as effective as haloperidol, and as effective as risperidone or olanzapine, in the treatment of patients with schizophrenia manifesting predominantly positive symptoms. In the treatment of patients manifesting predominantly negative symptoms, low dosages of amisulpride (50-300 mg/day) are significantly more effective than placebo. Amisulpride appears to be better tolerated than haloperidol, causing a lower incidence of extrapyramidal adverse effects and an improved quality of life. Compared with risperidone or olanzapine, amisulpride is more likely to cause hyperprolactinaemia, but has a lower propensity to cause weight gain and does not seem to be associated with diabetogenic effects. Thus, amisulpride is an effective and well tolerated option for the first-line treatment of patients with acute schizophrenia as well as for those requiring long-term maintenance therapy.

Amisulpride↗

PubMed2003

Atovaquone/proguanil: a review of its use for the prophylaxis of Plasmodium falciparum malaria.

UNLABELLED: Atovaquone/proguanil is a fixed-dose combination tablet of two antimalarial agents and is highly effective for the prevention of Plasmodium falciparum malaria. In combination with proguanil, the ability of atovaquone to inhibit parasitic mitochondrial electron transport is markedly enhanced. Both atovaquone and proguanil are active against hepatic (pre-erythrocytic) stages of P. falciparum, thereby providing causal prophylaxis and eliminating the need to continue post-travel treatment beyond 7 days. Both agents are also active against erythrocytic stages of P. falciparum, thereby providing suppressive prophylaxis. Atovaquone/proguanil is highly effective against drug-resistant strains of P. falciparum, and cross-resistance has not been observed between atovaquone and other antimalarial agents. In comparative, randomised clinical trials, there were no cases of P. falciparum malaria in nonimmune adults, adolescents and children (>/=11 kg) visiting malaria-endemic regions for </=28 days and receiving atovaquone/proguanil (250/100 mg in adults and dosage based on bodyweight in children <40 kg) once daily. The efficacy for the prevention of P. falciparum malaria was estimated at 100% for atovaquone/proguanil and for mefloquine, and 70% for chloroquine plus proguanil. In individuals (>/=11 kg) from endemic regions who may carry some immunity to malaria (semi-immune), the prophylactic efficacy rating for atovaquone/proguanil based on placebo-controlled trials was 95-100%. Atovaquone/proguanil is generally well tolerated by both adults and children. The most common treatment-related adverse events in placebo-controlled trials were headache and abdominal pain, which occurred at a rate similar to that observed with placebo. Atovaquone/proguanil therapy was associated with significantly fewer gastrointestinal adverse events than chloroquine plus proguanil, and significantly fewer neuropsychiatric adverse events than mefloquine in nonimmune individuals. Significantly fewer recipients of atovaquone/proguanil discontinued treatment because of adverse events than individuals receiving chloroquine plus proguanil or mefloquine (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Atovaquone/proguanil is a fixed-dose combination antimalarial tablet that provides effective prophylaxis of P. falciparum malaria, including drug-resistant strains. Both atovaquone and proguanil are effective against hepatic stages of P. falciparum, which means that treatment need only continue for 7 days after leaving a malaria-endemic region. Atovaquone/proguanil was generally well tolerated and was associated with fewer gastrointestinal adverse events than chloroquine plus proguanil, and fewer neuropsychiatric adverse events than mefloquine. Thus, atovaquone/proguanil provides effective prophylaxis of P. falciparum malaria and compared with other commonly used antimalarial agents has an improved tolerability profile, and, overall, a more convenient dosage regimen, particularly in the post-travel period.

Animals↗

PubMed2003

Tacrolimus: a further update of its use in the management of organ transplantation.

UNLABELLED: Extensive clinical use has confirmed that tacrolimus (Prograf) is a key option for immunosuppression after transplantation. In large, prospective, randomised, multicentre trials in adults and children receiving solid organ transplants, tacrolimus was at least as effective or provided better efficacy than cyclosporin microemulsion in terms of patient and graft survival, treatment failure rates and the incidence of biopsy-proven acute and corticosteroid-resistant rejection episodes. Notably, the lower incidence of rejection episodes after renal transplantation in tacrolimus recipients was reflected in improved cost effectiveness. In bone marrow transplant (BMT) recipients, the incidence of tacrolimus grade II-IV graft-versus-host disease was significantly lower with tacrolimus than cyclosporin treatment. Efficacy was maintained in renal and liver transplant recipients after total withdrawal of corticosteroid therapy from tacrolimus-based immunosuppression, with the incidence of acute rejection episodes at up to 2 years' follow-up being similar with or without corticosteroids. Tacrolimus provided effective rescue therapy in transplant recipients with persistent acute or chronic allograft rejection or drug-related toxicity associated with cyclosporin treatment. Typically, conversion to tacrolimus reversed rejection episodes and/or improved the tolerability profile, particularly in terms of reduced hyperlipidaemia. In lung transplant recipients with obliterative bronchiolitis, conversion to tacrolimus reduced the decline in and/or improved lung function in terms of forced expiratory volume in 1 second. Tolerability issues may be a factor when choosing a calcineurin inhibitor. Cyclosporin tends to be associated with a higher incidence of significant hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, hirsutism, gingivitis and gum hyperplasia, whereas the incidence of some types of neurotoxicity, disturbances in glucose metabolism, diarrhoea, pruritus and alopecia may be higher with tacrolimus treatment. Renal function, as assessed by serum creatinine levels and glomerular filtration rates, was better in tacrolimus than cyclosporin recipients at up to 5 years' follow-up. CONCLUSION: Recent well designed trials have consolidated the place of tacrolimus as an important choice for primary immunosuppression in solid organ transplantation and in BMT. Notably, in adults and children receiving transplants, tacrolimus-based primary immunosuppression was at least as effective or provided better efficacy than cyclosporin microemulsion treatment in terms of patient and graft survival, treatment failure and the incidence of acute and corticosteroid-resistant rejection episodes. The reduced incidence of rejection episodes in renal transplant recipients receiving tacrolimus translated into a better cost effectiveness relative to cyclosporin microemulsion treatment. The optimal immunosuppression regimen is ultimately dependent on balancing such factors as the efficacy of the individual drugs, their tolerability, potential for drug interactions and pharmacoeconomic issues.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2003

Insulin glargine: an updated review of its use in the management of diabetes mellitus.

Insulin glargine is a human insulin analogue prepared by recombinant DNA technology. Modification of the human insulin molecule at position A21 and at the C-terminus of the B-chain results in the formation of a stable compound that is soluble at pH 4.0, but forms amorphous microprecipitates in subcutaneous tissue from which small amounts of insulin glargine are gradually released. The plasma concentration versus time profile of insulin glargine is therefore relatively constant in relation to conventional human insulins, with no pronounced peak over 24 hours. This allows once-daily administration as basal therapy. Early randomised trials with insulin glargine generally showed greater reductions in fasting blood or plasma glucose levels and a reduced frequency of nocturnal hypoglycaemia relative to neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. In addition to this basal therapy, patients continued to use the regular mealtime insulin regimen to which they were accustomed. More recent data with insulin glargine have included evidence of improved glycaemic control, with improvements in satisfaction with treatment over NPH insulin. Furthermore, the time of day at which insulin glargine is injected has no clinically relevant effect on glycaemic control in these patients. There are also data from small, nonblind studies to suggest comparable glycaemic control with insulin glargine and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion. Results from comparative studies and meta-analyses in individuals with type 2 diabetes show lower incidences of nocturnal hypoglycaemia with insulin glargine than with NPH insulin, with two studies showing a significantly greater improvement in glycosylated haemoglobin levels with insulin glargine than with NPH. Insulin glargine is well tolerated, and is not associated with greater immunogenicity or increases in bodyweight than NPH insulin. Long-term data show maintenance of glycaemic control with insulin glargine for up to 39 months in adults and children with type 1 and adults with type 2 diabetes. In conclusion, insulin glargine is an effective and well tolerated basal insulin therapy when given as a single daily subcutaneous injection to patients with diabetes, with benefits in terms of glycaemic control and reduced frequency of hypoglycaemia over regimens based on conventional basal insulins. Accumulating data and official recommendations show the suitability of insulin glargine for first-line use in selected patients with type 2 diabetes who require insulin treatment, as well as in patients with type 1 disease, and confirm its use in children and adolescents.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2003

Octreotide long-acting release (LAR): a review of its use in the management of acromegaly.

Octreotide long-acting release (LAR) is a somatostatin analogue designed for once monthly intramuscular injection. As with endogenous somatostatin, octreotide LAR inhibits secretion of growth hormone (GH) as well as various other peptide hormones. In the treatment of acromegaly, octreotide LAR effectively controlled the secretion of GH and insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) in about 55-70% of patients (n > 100) who had previously been treated with somatostatin analogues, a similar degree of control to that observed with subcutaneous octreotide and lanreotide slow release (SR). Progressive control of serum levels of GH and IGF-1 was achieved with octreotide LAR in clinical studies of up to 4 years' duration. In addition, primary therapy with octreotide LAR provided effective control of GH and IGF-1 secretion, particularly in patients with a pretreatment GH level <20 microg/L. The percentage of patients achieving a target serum GH level of <2-2.5 micro g/L or normal IGF-1 levels was significantly greater with octreotide LAR 10, 20 or 30 mg every 28 days than with lanreotide SR 30 mg every 7-14 days in a large (n = 125) sequential, 6-month study, but was not significantly different between treatment groups in a small, randomised, nonblind, parallel group study of previously untreated patients. The volume of pituitary tumour shrinkage achieved with octreotide LAR or lanreotide SR was also similar ( approximate, equals 33% after 24 months). Acromegaly symptoms, such as headache, increased perspiration, paraesthesia, fatigue and osteoarthralgia were improved during treatment with octreotide LAR or lanreotide SR. Overall, octreotide LAR is generally well tolerated by most patients. The incidence of gastrointestinal symptoms is about 30% but, in most cases, events are transient and mild to moderate. Gallbladder abnormalities (sediment, sludge, microlithiasis and gallstones) can occur, but only 1% have become symptomatic to date. The prevalence of biliary abnormalities did not change after switching from subcutaneous octreotide, or from lanreotide SR, to octreotide LAR. Glucose metabolism can be affected by octreotide LAR in some patients; about 15% become hyperglycaemic, usually mild in severity. In summary, octreotide LAR controls GH and IGF-1 secretion in about 55-70% of patients with acromegaly. Octreotide LAR is administered intramuscularly every 28 days, offering improved patient compliance and convenience over three-times-daily subcutaneous octreotide. Long-term therapy provides progressive control of serum GH and IGF-1 levels, and is generally well tolerated by most patients. Thus, for the medical management of acromegaly, octreotide LAR is an effective, well tolerated and convenient treatment option.

Acromegaly↗

PubMed2003

Propofol: a review of its use in intensive care sedation of adults.

UNLABELLED: Propofol (Diprivan) is a phenolic derivative with sedative and hypnotic properties but is unrelated to other sedative/hypnotic agents. Formulated as an oil-in-water emulsion for intravenous use, it is highly lipophilic and rapidly crosses the blood-brain barrier resulting in a rapid onset of action. Emergence from sedation is also rapid because of a fast redistribution into peripheral tissues and metabolic clearance. The depth of sedation increases in a dose-dependent manner. In well designed clinical trials in patients receiving sedation in the intensive care unit (ICU) for a variety of indications, propofol provided adequate sedation for a similar proportion of time to midazolam, but the rate of recovery was faster with propofol. Even after periods of prolonged sedation (>72 hours), propofol was generally associated with a faster time to recovery than midazolam. Propofol facilitated better predictability of recovery and an improved control of the depth of sedation in response to titration than midazolam. In patients sedated following head trauma, propofol reduced or maintained intracranial pressure. Propofol is associated with generally good haemodynamic stability but induces a dose-dependent decrease in blood pressure and heart rate. Bolus administration may cause transient hypotension, and slow initial infusions are recommended in most patients. Serum triglyceride concentrations should be monitored during prolonged infusions (>3 days) because of the risk of hypertriglyceridaemia. The administration of 2% propofol can reduce this risk. Strict aseptic technique must be used during the handling of the product to prevent accidental extrinsic microbial contamination. Despite a higher acquisition cost with propofol, most studies of short-term sedation (approximately <3 days) showed that overall costs were lower with propofol than with midazolam, because a faster time to extubation reduced total ICU costs. However, as the period of sedation increased, the cost difference decreased. CONCLUSION: The efficacy of propofol in the sedation of adults in the ICU is well established, and clinical trials have demonstrated a similar quality of sedation to midazolam. Because of a rapid distribution and clearance, the duration of action of propofol is short and recovery is rapid. Emergence from sedation is more rapid with propofol than with midazolam, even after long-term administration (>72 hours), which enables better control of the depth of sedation in response to titration and more predictable recovery times. Thus, for the ICU sedation of adults in a variety of clinical settings, propofol provides effective sedation with a more rapid and predictable emergence time than midazolam.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

SLI-381 (Adderall XR).

SLI-381 is an extended-release formulation of short-acting Adderall, a racemic mixture of dextro- and levo-isomers of amphetamine salts. Drug-containing microbeads within the SLI-381 capsule give a double-pulsed delivery, similar to that achieved by two equal doses of the short-acting formulation administered 4 hours apart. In an intent-to-treat analysis of a 3-week, double-blind study in 563 children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), SLI-381 10, 20 or 30 mg once daily improved mean morning and afternoon behaviour scores compared with baseline significantly more than placebo (p < 0.001 for all comparisons), as assessed by the Connors Global Index Scale for teachers (CGIS-T). Following treatment, CGIS-T scores were similar to those reported in children without ADHD. In the same study, a dose-response relationship was observed, and increasing the dosage of SLI-381 by 10mg at weekly intervals, to a maximum of 30 mg once daily, resulted in further improvements in the scores of the CGIS-T. After early morning administration of SLI-381 in this double-blind study, late-afternoon scores of the CGIS for parents were similar to morning scores. SLI-381 was generally well tolerated in randomised trials in children with ADHD for up to 24 months. Overall, adverse events were mild to moderate in intensity.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

The sirolimus-eluting stent: a review of its use in the treatment of coronary artery disease.

UNLABELLED: The sirolimus-eluting stent (CYPHER( trade mark )) is a metal stent coated with 140 micro g/cm(2) of sirolimus blended with synthetic polymers. After stent implantation, sirolimus is slowly released causing localized cytostatic inhibition of proliferation of vascular smooth muscle cells in the peri-stent arterial wall over a period of about 1 month. Only minimal amounts of sirolimus enter the bloodstream and these appear to be insufficient to be of clinical relevance. In clinical trials that evaluated single de novo lesions and in-stent restenosis in patients with coronary artery disease, the sirolimus-eluting stent was associated with minimal neointimal hyperplasia. In four randomized trials in de novo lesions, sirolimus eluting stents produced a significantly lower incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) than that observed in patients with uncoated stents, during periods of up to 2 years (p < 0.05 for all comparisons). The lower incidence of MACE was mostly due to a reduced requirement for repeat target vessel revascularization. At angiographic follow-up at periods of up to 8 months, late luminal loss was significantly smaller in the sirolimus-eluting stent groups than in the uncoated-stent groups (p < 0.001 in all studies). The sirolimus-eluting stent was well tolerated in clinical trials of up to 3 years' follow-up. Because minimal blood levels of sirolimus are achieved, systemic adverse effects appear to be avoided. To date, there has been no evidence of any potential adverse effects resulting from the polymer coating or local drug toxicity. As yet, there is no evidence of an increased risk of subacute or late thrombosis, or aneurysm formation with the sirolimus-eluting stent compared with the uncoated stent. Long-term follow-up is needed to fully assess these theoretical concerns. Cost-effectiveness analyses over 12 months demonstrated a cost advantage for the sirolimus-eluting stent compared with an uncoated stent because of a reduced requirement for repeat target vessel revascularizations. CONCLUSION: Initial clinical trials with the sirolimus-eluting stent in patients with de novo coronary lesions have shown a significantly reduced incidence of MACE and of restenosis compared with a standard stent. Efficacy appears to be maintained throughout follow-up periods of up to 2 years in randomized trials, and to date, systemic or local adverse effects have been avoided. If efficacy and tolerability are consistently demonstrated over the long term, the sirolimus-eluting stent will be a major advance in the control of in-stent restenosis.

Coronary Artery Disease↗

PubMed2002

Trastuzumab: a review of its use in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer overexpressing HER2.

UNLABELLED: Trastuzumab is a humanised monoclonal antibody developed to target the HER2 receptor which is overexpressed by some cancer cells, including 25 to 30% of breast cancers. Binding with high affinity to the extracellular domain of HER2, trastuzumab inhibits the proliferation of tumour cells that overexpress HER2. A large well designed multicentre study found that the addition of trastuzumab to either an anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide or to paclitaxel, as first-line therapy for metastatic breast cancer overexpressing the HER2 receptor, significantly increased time to disease progression, rate of objective response, duration of response and survival compared with chemotherapy alone. Single-agent trastuzumab was associated with an objective response in 15% of extensively pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer overexpressing HER2, and 26% of previously untreated patients. Patients with a HER2 overexpression level of 3+ using immunohistochemical (IHC) assay or a positive HER2 result using fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH), benefit more from trastuzumab therapy than those with tumours overexpressing at a level of 2+. Trastuzumab has demonstrated synergistic action with several chemotherapy agents preclinically but the optimal combination clinically is yet to be determined. Trastuzumab is generally well tolerated by most patients; the most significant adverse effects being acute fever and/or chills and the potential to cause cardiac dysfunction. Serious adverse events, including anaphylaxis and death, have occurred in 0.25% of patients. Symptomatic or asymptomatic cardiac dysfunction occurred in 27% of patients receiving an anthracycline and cyclophosphamide combined with trastuzumab. Thus, combination therapy with anthracyclines is not recommended. Symptomatic or asymptomatic cardiac dysfunction occurred in 13% of patients receiving trastuzumab plus paclitaxel and in 4.7% of patients receiving trastuzumab alone. CONCLUSION: Intravenous trastuzumab is effective as a single-agent, and in combination with chemotherapy it significantly improves the median time to disease progression and survival time in patients with metastatic breast cancer overexpressing the HER2 receptor compared with chemotherapy alone. Cardiotoxicity is the main concern with therapy; particularly in patients with pre-existing cardiac dysfunction, the elderly and in combination with, or following, anthracyclines. Trastuzumab is indicated for use with paclitaxel as first-line therapy or as a single agent in second- or third-line treatment regimens for patients with metastatic breast cancer overexpressing HER2. Investigation is ongoing to ascertain the optimal combination regimen containing trastuzumab and antineoplastic agents. In addition, current research is focusing on the optimal timing, sequencing and duration of therapy as well as administration in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant setting.

Antibodies, Monoclonal↗

PubMed2002

Alfuzosin: a review of the therapeutic use of the prolonged-release formulation given once daily in the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia.

UNLABELLED: Alfuzosin, a quinazoline derivative, is a selective and competitive alpha(1)-adrenoceptor antagonist. It distributes preferentially in the prostate, compared with plasma, and decreases the sympathetically controlled tone of prostatic smooth muscle. As a result lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) are improved. The once-daily formulation of alfuzosin contains inactive barrier layers which have been added to the planar surfaces of compressed tablets. Drug release is sustained over 20 hours with a near constant dissolution rate between 2 and 12 hours. Mean values for area under the plasma concentration-time curve over 24 hours (AUC(24)) were similar after administration of prolonged-release alfuzosin 10mg once daily and immediate-release alfuzosin 2.5mg three times daily. Likewise, similar AUC(24) values were reported when prolonged-release alfuzosin 10mg once daily and sustained-release alfuzosin 5mg twice daily were compared. These data suggest that these alfuzosin regimens provide similar average systemic exposure. Data from short- (3 months) and long-term (up to 12 months) clinical trials show that the prolonged-release formulation of alfuzosin controls the symptoms associated with BPH as effectively as immediate-release alfuzosin 2.5mg three times daily and clinical improvement is maintained for up to 1 year. Improvements in International Prostate Symptom Score, maximum urinary flow rate and quality-of-life index were improved to a similar extent in patients treated with immediate- or prolonged-release alfuzosin and improvements were statistically significant compared with placebo. Prolonged-release alfuzosin 10mg is well tolerated and the overall incidence of adverse events is similar to that seen with placebo. The once-daily formulation of alfuzosin 10mg caused fewer vasodilatory adverse events than immediate-release alfuzosin 2.5mg three times daily and caused only slight decreases in systolic and diastolic blood pressure which were not clinically significant and did not differ significantly from those with placebo. No dosage titration is required. The incidence of ejaculatory disorders was <1%. CONCLUSION: Prolonged-release alfuzosin 10mg once daily controls symptoms associated with BPH throughout a 24-hour dosage interval as effectively as immediate-release alfuzosin 2.5mg three times daily but with fewer vasodilatory adverse events. A nonblind extension study showed that clinical benefits were maintained for up to 1 year and the once-daily 10mg formulation continued to be well tolerated, particularly in terms of cardiovascular effects and sexual function. Thus, for the medical management of men with BPH, prolonged-release alfuzosin 10mg is an effective, well tolerated and convenient treatment option.

Absorption↗

PubMed2002

Budesonide (Entocort EC Capsules): a review of its therapeutic use in the management of active Crohn's disease in adults.

UNLABELLED: Budesonide (Entocort EC Capsules) is an oral corticosteroid with a high degree of topical activity and low systemic bioavailability (approximately 11%). This action is achieved by a high affinity for the glucocorticoid receptor and an extensive first-pass hepatic metabolism. The budesonide capsule has been formulated to dissolve in a pH dependent manner, delivering most of the drug to the ileum and ascending colon, areas of the intestine most commonly affected by Crohn's disease. In large (n > or = 176), well designed clinical trials of 10 to 12 weeks' duration in patients with active, mild to moderate Crohn's disease, budesonide (9 mg/day) was significantly more effective in inducing remission than placebo or mesalazine (mesalamine) slow release, and demonstrated similar efficacy to recommended dosages of prednisolone. Results of health-related quality-of-life assessments support clinical data, showing a significantly greater improvement among patients treated with budesonide than with placebo or mesalazine slow release. Oral budesonide was well tolerated in clinical trials of up to 16 weeks' duration. In these studies, the incidence of adverse events associated with budesonide (9 mg/day) was similar to that seen with placebo and mesalazine slow release. The rate of glucocorticoid-related adverse effects observed with budesonide was significantly less than that reported with prednisolone. CONCLUSION: Oral budesonide 9 mg/day offers efficacy that is superior to mesalazine slow release and placebo, and similar to prednisolone in the treatment of patients with active mild to moderate Crohn's disease involving the ileum and/or ascending colon. Budesonide is generally well tolerated and the incidence of adverse events is similar to that seen with placebo or mesalazine slow release. Glucocorticoid-related adverse effects are significantly less frequent during short-term therapy with budesonide than with prednisolone. Thus, for the medical management of patients with active mild to moderate Crohn's disease, oral budesonide has superior efficacy to mesalazine slow release and a more favourable tolerability profile than prednisolone.

Administration, Oral↗

PubMed2002

Spotlight on insulin glargine in type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus.

Insulin glargine is a recombinant human insulin analog produced by DNA technology using a nonpathogenic strain of Escherichia coli. Two modifications of human insulin result in a stable molecule which is soluble in slightly acidic conditions (pH 4.0) and precipitates in the neutral pH of subcutaneous tissue. Because of these properties, absorption of insulin glargine is delayed and the analog provides a fairly constant, basal insulin supply without peaks in plasma insulin levels for approximately 24 hours, similar to that achieved by a continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion. Insulin glargine is indicated as a once daily subcutaneous injection to provide basal glycemic control in adults and children aged >6 years with type 1 diabetes mellitus and in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Fasting plasma glucose and fasting blood glucose levels generally improved to a greater extent in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus receiving insulin glargine than patients who administered Neutral Protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin. In patients with type 1 or 2 disease, glycosylated hemoglobin levels were slightly reduced and to a similar extent with insulin glargine and NPH insulin. Most clinical trials in patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus demonstrated a lower incidence of hypoglycemia, especially nocturnal hypoglycemia, with insulin glargine compared with NPH insulin. One of the most common adverse events with insulin glargine treatment was injection site pain which, in some studies, occurred more frequently than in patients receiving NPH insulin. In all cases the symptoms were mild and treatment discontinuation was not required. Otherwise, the drug is well tolerated and does not appear to be immunogenic. In conclusion, insulin glargine once a day provides basal control of glycemia for approximately 24 hours without inducing peaks in plasma insulin levels in patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus. In long-term, well designed trials insulin glargine once daily improved glycemic control at least as effectively as NPH insulin given once or twice daily. The drug was well tolerated and in most studies the incidence of nocturnal hypoglycemia was significantly less in patients treated with insulin glargine compared with patients receiving NPH insulin. Therefore, insulin glargine is likely to be a useful addition to the armamentarium of insulin therapy by establishing basal glycemic control with once daily administration and a reduced risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia.

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1↗