METHODS: In two phase 3 trials, we assessed iptacopan monotherapy over a 24-week period in patients with hemoglobin levels of less than 10 g per deciliter. In the first, anti-C5-treated patients were randomly assigned to switch to iptacopan or to continue anti-C5 therapy. In the second, single-group trial, patients who had not received complement inhibitors and who had lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels more than 1.5 times the upper limit of the normal range received iptacopan. The two primary end points in the first trial were an increase in the hemoglobin level of at least 2 g per deciliter from baseline and a hemoglobin level of at least 12 g per deciliter, each without red-cell transfusion; the primary end point for the second trial was an increase in hemoglobin level of at least 2 g per deciliter from baseline without red-cell transfusion.
RESULTS: In the first trial, 51 of the 60 patients who received iptacopan had an increase in the hemoglobin level of at least 2 g per deciliter from baseline, and 42 had a hemoglobin level of at least 12 g per deciliter, each without transfusion; none of the 35 anti-C5-treated patients attained the end-point levels. In the second trial, 31 of 33 patients had an increase in the hemoglobin level of at least 2 g per deciliter from baseline without red-cell transfusion. In the first trial, 59 of the 62 patients who received iptacopan and 14 of the 35 anti-C5-treated patients did not require or receive transfusion; in the second trial, no patients required or received transfusion. Treatment with iptacopan increased hemoglobin levels, reduced fatigue, reduced reticulocyte and bilirubin levels, and resulted in mean LDH levels that were less than 1.5 times the upper limit of the normal range. Headache was the most frequent adverse event with iptacopan.
CONCLUSIONS: Iptacopan treatment improved hematologic and clinical outcomes in anti-C5-treated patients with persistent anemia - in whom iptacopan showed superiority to anti-C5 therapy - and in patients who had not received complement inhibitors. (Funded by Novartis; APPLY-PNH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04558918; APPOINT-PNH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04820530.).
METHODS: A systematic search of articles was conducted in scientific databases, with the latest update in May 2021. This paper systematically reviewed the clinical evidence available (randomized controlled trials, compassionate use studies, and case reports) on the use of remdesivir for patients with moderate or severe COVID-19.
RESULTS: A total of eleven studies were included: four studies based on compassionate use of remdesivir, three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trials, three randomized, open-label, phase III trials, and one case report. Clinical improvement and mortality rates in patients who used remdesivir varied across studies.
CONCLUSION: Given the current evidence, there is insufficient data to confidently recommend the use of remdesivir alone for the treatment of adult hospitalized patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19. However, remdesivir may be considered along with an anti-inflammatory agent in patients with pneumonia, on oxygen support, provided there is close monitoring of clinical and laboratory parameters and adverse events.
STUDY QUESTION: Whether FDA death data in the PLATO trial matched the local site records.
STUDY DESIGN: The NDA spreadsheet contains 938 precisely detailed PLATO deaths. We obtained and validated local evidence for 52 deaths among 861 PLATO patients from 14 enrolling sites in 8 countries and matched those with the official NDA dataset submitted to the FDA.
MEASURES AND OUTCOMES: Existence, precise time, and primary cause of deaths in PLATO.
RESULTS: Discrepant to the NDA document, sites confirmed 2 extra unreported deaths (Poland and Korea) and failed to confirm 4 deaths (Malaysia). Of the remaining 46 deaths, dates were reported correctly for 42 patients, earlier (2 clopidogrel), or later (2 ticagrelor) than the actual occurrence of death. In 12 clopidogrel patients, cause of death was changed to "vascular," whereas 6 NDA ticagrelor "nonvascular" or "unknown" deaths were site-reported as of "vascular" origin. Sudden death was incorrectly reported in 4 clopidogrel patients, but omitted in 4 ticagrelor patients directly affecting the primary efficacy PLATO endpoint.
CONCLUSIONS: Many deaths were inaccurately reported in PLATO favoring ticagrelor. The full extent of mortality misreporting is currently unclear, while especially worrisome is a mismatch in identifying primary death cause. Because all PLATO events are kept in the cloud electronic Medidata Rave capture system, securing the database content, examining the dataset changes or/and repeated entries, identifying potential interference origin, and assessing full magnitude of the problem are warranted.
METHODS: Vaccination impact was investigated with an age-structured, host-vector, serotype-specific compartmental model. Parameters related to vaccine efficacy and levels of dengue transmission were estimated using data collected during the phase III efficacy studies. Several vaccination programs, including routine vaccination at different ages with and without large catch-up campaigns, were investigated.
RESULTS: All vaccination programs explored translated into significant reductions in dengue cases at the population level over the first 10years following vaccine introduction and beyond. The most efficient age for vaccination varied according to transmission intensity and 9years was close to the most efficient age across all settings. The combination of routine vaccination and large catch-up campaigns was found to enable a rapid reduction of dengue burden after vaccine introduction.
CONCLUSION: Our analysis suggests that dengue vaccination can significantly reduce the public health impact of dengue in countries where the disease is endemic.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two EGFR mutation tests, a tissue-based assay (cobas® v1) and a tissue- and blood-based assay (cobas® v2) were used to analyze matched biopsy and blood samples (897 paired samples) from three Asian studies of first-line erlotinib with similar intent-to-treat populations. ENSURE was a phase III comparison of erlotinib and gemcitabine/platinum, FASTACT-2 was a phase III study of gemcitabine/platinum plus erlotinib or placebo, and ASPIRATION was a single-arm phase II study of erlotinib. Agreement statistics were evaluated, based on sensitivity and specificity between the two assays in subgroups of patients with increasing tumor burden.
RESULTS: Patients with discordant EGFR (tissue+/plasma-) mutation status achieved longer progression-free and overall survival than those with concordant (tissue+/plasma+) mutation status. Tumor burden was significantly greater in patients with concordant versus discordant mutations. Pooled analyses of data from the three studies showed a sensitivity of 72.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 67.8-76.1) and a specificity of 97.9% (95% CI 96.0-99.0) for blood-based testing; sensitivity was greatest in patients with larger baseline tumors.
CONCLUSIONS: Blood-based EGFR mutation testing demonstrated high specificity and good sensitivity, and offers a convenient and easily accessible diagnostic method to complement tissue-based tests. Patients with a discordant mutation status in plasma and tissue, had improved survival outcomes compared with those with a concordant mutation status, which may be due to their lower tumor burden. These data help to inform the clinical utility of this blood-based assay for the detection of EGFR mutations.
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Tumor tissue EGFRm status was determined at screening using the central cobas tissue test or a local tissue test. Baseline circulating tumor (ct)DNA EGFRm status was retrospectively determined with the central cobas plasma test.
RESULTS: Of 994 patients screened, 556 were randomized (289 and 267 with central and local EGFR test results, respectively) and 438 failed screening. Of those randomized from local EGFR test results, 217 patients had available central test results; 211/217 (97%) were retrospectively confirmed EGFRm positive by central cobas tissue test. Using reference central cobas tissue test results, positive percent agreements with cobas plasma test results for Ex19del and L858R detection were 79% [95% confidence interval (CI), 74-84] and 68% (95% CI, 61-75), respectively. Progression-free survival (PFS) superiority with osimertinib over comparator EGFR-TKI remained consistent irrespective of randomization route (central/local EGFRm-positive tissue test). In both treatment arms, PFS was prolonged in plasma ctDNA EGFRm-negative (23.5 and 15.0 months) versus -positive patients (15.2 and 9.7 months).
CONCLUSIONS: Our results support utility of cobas tissue and plasma testing to aid selection of patients with EGFRm advanced NSCLC for first-line osimertinib treatment. Lack of EGFRm detection in plasma was associated with prolonged PFS versus patients plasma EGFRm positive, potentially due to patients having lower tumor burden.