JavaScript NENÍ povolen !

* Zobrazit nápovědu

MeSH: inhibitory angiogeneze-škodlivé účinky

87 záznamů v Medvik Filtry

Článek

Aflibercept Biosimilar MYL-1701P vs Reference Aflibercept in Diabetic Macular Edema: The INSIGHT Randomized Clinical Trial

Bressler, Susan B
Autor Bressler, Susan B Wilmer Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
Barve, Abhijit
Autor Barve, Abhijit Viatris Inc, Canonsburg, Pennsylvania
Ganapathi, Prasanna C
Autor Ganapathi, Prasanna C Viatris, Bangalore, India
Beckmann, Katrin
Autor Beckmann, Katrin Viatris Healthcare GmbH, Hannover, Germany
Apte, Rajendra S
Autor Apte, Rajendra S Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri
Marcus, Dennis M
Autor Marcus, Dennis M Southeast Retina Center Ophthalmology Department, Augusta, Georgia
Baumane, Kristine
Autor Baumane, Kristine Riga East Clinical University Hospital, Riga, Latvia
Agarwal, Somesh
Autor Agarwal, Somesh M & J Institute of Ophthalmology-BJ Medical College, Gujarat, India
Oleksy, Piotr
Autor Oleksy, Piotr Centrum Medyczne UNO-MED, Tarnow, Poland
Reichstein, David A
Autor Reichstein, David A Tennessee Retina, Nashville

JAMA ophthalmology. 2024 ; 142 (10) : 952-960. [pub] 20241001

JAMA Ophthalmol
ISSN 2168-6173
Medvik
Zdroj

IMPORTANCE: Biosimilars may be lower-cost alternatives to originator biologic products, potentially offering expanded access or reduced economic burden, but have not been evaluated with aflibercept in diabetic macular edema (DME). OBJECTIVE: To compare efficacy and safety of MYL-1701P, an aflibercept biosimilar, with reference aflibercept (Eylea [Regeneron]) in DME. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a double-masked, randomized clinical trial that included participants at 77 centers across the US, Europe, Japan, and India. Included in the analysis were individuals 18 years and older with type 1 or type 2 diabetes with central DME and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) letter score of 73 to 38 in the study eye using an Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart. Study data were analyzed from October to December 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Formulations of MYL-1701P (0.5-mg vial) or reference aflibercept every 4 weeks for 5 consecutive intravitreal injections, followed by every 8 weeks through week 52. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was the adjusted difference in least squares mean (SE) change from baseline BCVA letter score at week 8 with an equivalence margin of -3 to +3 letters. Secondary outcomes included change in central subfield thickness (CST), BCVA, number of injections over 52 weeks, incidence of adverse events (AEs), and antidrug antibodies (ADAs). RESULTS: A total of 355 participants (mean [SD] age, 62.2 [9.2] years; 216 male [60.8%]) were randomized to MYL-1701P (179 participants [50.4%]) and aflibercept (176 participants [49.6%]). At week 8, mean (SE) change in BCVA was 6.60 (0.55) letters vs 6.56 (0.55) letters in the MYL-1701P vs aflibercept groups. The adjusted mean difference of 0.04 letters (90% CI, -1.16 to 1.24 letters) met the primary outcome. At week 8, mean (SE) change in CST was -112 (7) μm vs -124 (7) μm in the MYL-1701P vs aflibercept groups (adjusted mean difference, 12 μm; 90% CI, -3 to 26 μm). The incidence of treatment-emergent AEs in the MYL-1701P and aflibercept arms were ocular (30.9% [55 of 178] vs 29.5% [52 of 176]), serious ocular (0.6% [1 of 178] vs 1.1% [2 of 176]), nonocular (65.2% [116 of 178] vs 65.3% [115 of 176]), and serious nonocular (16.9% [30 of 178] vs 11.9% [21 of 176]). The mean (SD) total number of injections was 8.4 (2.1) vs 8.7 (1.8) in the MYL-1701P vs aflibercept groups. The incidence of treatment-induced or treatment-boosted ADAs was 2.8% (5 of 177) vs 5.7% (10 of 176) in the MYL-1701P vs aflibercept arms. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: MYL-1701P demonstrated clinical equivalence in regard to efficacy, with comparable safety and immunogenicity, to reference aflibercept. These findings support use of MLY-1701P as an alternative to reference aflibercept. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03610646.

Článek

Efficacy and Safety of the Aflibercept Biosimilar SB15 in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial

JAMA Ophthalmology. 2023 ; 141 (7) : 668-676. [pub] 2023Jul01

JAMA Ophthalmol
ISSN 2168-6173
Medvik
Zdroj

IMPORTANCE: Aflibercept biosimilars can expand available treatment options in retinal diseases and have the potential to improve patient access to safe and effective therapy. OBJECTIVE: To establish equivalence in efficacy and similarity in safety, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity of SB15 and reference aflibercept (AFL) in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a randomized double-masked parallel group phase 3 trial conducted at 56 centers in 10 countries from June 2020 to March 2022, including follow-up through 56 weeks. Of 549 screened participants, 449 participants 50 years and older with treatment-naive nAMD were included and randomly assigned to SB15 (n = 224) or AFL (n = 225). Key exclusion criteria included considerable scarring, fibrosis, atrophy, and hemorrhage. This report includes results up to the end of the parallel group period at week 32. Of the 449 randomized participants, 438 (97.6%) completed week 32 follow-up. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive 2 mg of SB15 or AFL every 4 weeks for the first 12 weeks (3 injections), followed by dosing every 8 weeks up to week 48, with final assessments at week 56. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was the change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline to week 8 with predefined equivalence margins of -3 letters to 3 letters. Other key end points were changes in BCVA and central subfield thickness up to week 32, safety, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity. RESULTS: The mean (SD) age among the 449 included participants was 74.0 (8.1) years, and 250 participants (55.7%) were female. Baseline demographic characteristics and most disease characteristics were comparable between treatment groups. The least squares mean change in BCVA from baseline to week 8 in the SB15 group was equivalent to that in the AFL group (6.7 letters vs 6.6 letters, respectively; difference, 0.1 letters; 95% CI, -1.3 to 1.4). Comparable efficacy between treatment groups was maintained up to week 32 (least squares mean change from baseline in BCVA: SB15, 7.6 letters vs AFL, 6.5 letters; least squares mean change from baseline in central subfield thickness: SB15, -110.4 μm vs AFL, -115.7 μm). No clinically relevant differences were observed in the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) (SB15, 107/224 [47.8%] vs AFL, 98/224 [43.8%]) and ocular TEAEs in the study eye (SB15, 41/224 [18.3%] vs AFL, 28/224 [12.5%]). The serum concentration profiles and cumulative incidences of overall antidrug antibody positive participants were comparable. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this phase 3 randomized clinical trial, SB15 and AFL showed equivalent efficacy and comparable safety, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity in participants with nAMD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04450329.

Článek

Kardiovaskulární nežádoucí účinky anti-VEGF terapie v onkologii
[Cardiovascular side effects of anti-VEGF therapy in oncology]

Lapka, Marek
Autor Autorita Ústav farmakologie 3. LF UK, Praha

Remedia. 2021 ; 31 (3) : 260-263.

ISSN 0862-8947
Medvik
Zdroj

Porozumění fyziologické roli vaskulárního endoteliálního růstového faktoru (VEGF) poskytuje vhled do mechanismu nežádoucích účinků (NÚ) připisovaných použití inhibitorů VEGF v klinické onkologii. Nežádoucí účinky představují důsledky potlačení buněčných signálních drah důležitých při regulaci a zachování vaskulárního systému a mohou vést k vaskulárním poruchám. Tento článek uvádí aktuální data o nejčastěji popsaných NÚ spojených s inhibitory VEGF při léčbě onkologických onemocnění. Mnoho léčiv s tímto mechanismem účinku je aktuálně ve vývoji, jsou hodnocena v klinických studiích nebo jsou již schválena k použití v onkologii. Rozšířené užívání zvyšuje pochopení jejich působení, zpřesňuje popis nepříznivých účinků spojených s jejich aplikací a zvyšuje povědomí o těchto NÚ.

Understanding the physiological role of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) provides insight into the mechanism of side effects (SEs) attributed to the use of VEGF inhibitors in clinical oncology. Side effects represent the consequences of repression of cell signal pathways important in the regulation and maintenance of vascular system that can lead to vascular disorders. This review provides current data on the most commonly described SEs associated with VEGF inhibitors in the therapy of oncological diseases. Many drugs with this mechanism of action are currently being developed, evaluated in clinical studies or already approved for use in oncology. Widespread use increases the understanding of their action, makes the description of SEs associated with their administration more precise and increases awareness of these SEs.

Článek

Local Bevacizumab Treatment of Juvenile-Onset Respiratory Papillomatosis Might Induce Multiple Tracheal Pyogenic Granulomas

The Laryngoscope. 2021 ; 131 (2) : E518-E520. [pub] 20200707

Laryngoscope
ISSN 1531-4995
Medvik
Zdroj

Článek

Addition of ramucirumab or merestinib to standard first-line chemotherapy for locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer: a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 2 study

Lancet oncology. 2021 ; 22 (10) : 1468-1482. [pub] -

Lancet Oncol.
ISSN 1474-5488
Medvik
Zdroj

BACKGROUND: Biliary tract cancers are aggressive, rare, gastrointestinal malignancies with a poor prognosis; approximately half of patients with these cancers survive for less than 1 year after diagnosis with advanced disease. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ramucirumab or merestinib in addition to first-line cisplatin-gemcitabine in patients with locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 study at 81 hospitals across 18 countries. We enrolled patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed, non-resectable, recurrent, or metastatic biliary tract adenocarcinoma, who were treatment-naive, aged 18 years or older, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, estimated life expectancy of 3 months or more, and measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (2:1:2:1) to receive either intravenous ramucirumab 8 mg/kg or placebo (on days 1 and 8 in 21-day cycles) or oral merestinib 80 mg or placebo (once daily) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, death, or patient or investigator request for discontinuation. All participants received intravenous cisplatin 25 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 (on days 1 and 8 in 21-day cycles), for a maximum of eight cycles. Randomisation was done by an interactive web response system using a permuted block method (blocks of six) and was stratified by primary tumour site, geographical region, and presence of metastatic disease. Participants, investigators, and the study funder were masked to treatment assignment within the intravenous and oral groups. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (in the intention-to-treat population). The safety analysis was done in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02711553, and long-term follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between May 25, 2016, and Aug 8, 2017, 450 patients were assessed for eligibility and 309 (69%) were enrolled and randomly assigned to ramucirumab (n=106), merestinib (n=102), or pooled placebo (n=101); 306 received at least one dose of study treatment. The median follow-up time for progression-free survival at data cutoff (Feb 16, 2018) was 10·9 months (IQR 8·1-14·1). Median progression-free survival was 6·5 months (80% CI 5·7-7·1) in the ramucirumab group, 7·0 months (6·2-7·1) in the merestinib group, and 6·6 months (5·6-6·8) in the pooled placebo group (ramucirumab vs placebo hazard ratio 1·12 [80% CI 0·90-1·40], two-sided stratified p=0·48; merestinib vs placebo 0·92 [0·73-1·15], two-sided stratified p=0·64). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (51 [49%] of 104 patients in the ramucirumab group; 48 [47%] of 102 in the merestinib group; and 33 [33%] of 100 in the pooled placebo group), thrombocytopenia (36 [35%]; 19 [19%]; and 17 [17%]), and anaemia (28 [27%]; 16 [16%]; and 19 [19%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 53 (51%) patients in the ramucirumab group, 56 (55%) in the merestinib group, and 48 (48%) in the pooled placebo group. Treatment-related deaths (deemed related by the investigator) occurred in one (1%) of 104 patients in the ramucirumab group (cardiac arrest) and two (2%) of 102 patients in the merestinib group (pulmonary embolism [n=1] and sepsis [n=1]). INTERPRETATION: Adding ramucirumab or merestinib to first-line cisplatin-gemcitabine was well tolerated, with no new safety signals, but neither improved progression-free survival in patients with molecularly unselected, locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer. The role of these targeted inhibitors remains investigational, highlighting the need for further understanding of biliary tract malignancies and the contribution of molecular selection. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Článek

Efficacy and Safety of a Proposed Ranibizumab Biosimilar Product vs a Reference Ranibizumab Product for Patients With Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Randomized Clinical Trial

JAMA Ophthalmology. 2021 ; 139 (1) : 68-76. [pub] 20210101

JAMA Ophthalmol
ISSN 2168-6173
Medvik
Zdroj

Importance: Neovascular age-related macular degeneration is the leading cause of blindness in individuals 50 years or older. The availability of a ranibizumab biosimilar product (SB11) may facilitate access to an effective alternative to this treatment. Objective: To demonstrate equivalence of efficacy, similar safety, and similar immunogenicity of SB11 compared with the reference ranibizumab. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized, double-masked, parallel-group phase 3 equivalence study was conducted in 75 centers in 9 countries from March 14, 2018, to December 9, 2019, among 705 participants 50 years or older with neovascular age-related macular degeneration with active subfoveal choroidal neovascularization lesions. Analysis was performed on an intent-to-treat basis. Interventions: Intravitreous injection of SB11 or ranibizumab, 0.5 mg, every 4 weeks through week 48. Main Outcomes and Measures: Preplanned interim analysis after all participants completed the week 24 assessment of primary efficacy end points at week 8 for change from baseline in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and week 4 for central subfield thickness (CST), with predefined equivalence margins for adjusted treatment differences of -3 letters to 3 letters for BCVA and -36 μm to 36 μm for CST. Results: Baseline and disease characteristics among 705 randomized participants (403 women [57.2%]; mean [SD] age, 74.1 [8.5] years) were comparable between treatment groups (SB11, 351; ranibizumab, 354). Least-squares mean (SE) changes in BCVA from baseline at week 8 were 6.2 (0.5) letters in the SB11 group vs 7.0 (0.5) letters in the ranibizumab group, with an adjusted treatment difference of -0.8 letter (90% CI, -1.8 to 0.2 letters). Least-squares mean (SE) changes in CST from baseline at week 4 were -108 (5) μm in the SB11 group vs -100 (5) μm in the ranibizumab group, with an adjusted treatment difference of -8 μm (95% CI, -19 to 3 μm). Incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events (231 of 350 [66.0%] vs 237 of 354 [66.9%]), including serious treatment-emergent adverse events (44 of 350 [12.6%] vs 44 of 354 [12.4%]) and treatment-emergent adverse events leading to study drug discontinuation (8 of 350 [2.3%] vs 5 of 354 [1.4%]), were similar in the SB11 and ranibizumab groups. Immunogenicity was low, with a cumulative incidence of antidrug antibodies up to week 24 of 3.0% (10 of 330) in the SB11 group and 3.1% (10 of 327) in the ranibizumab group. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings of equivalent efficacy and similar safety and immunogenicity profiles compared with ranibizumab support the use of SB11 for patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03150589.

Článek

Komplikace po stomatochirurgických výkonech: medikamentózně podmíněné nekrózy čelistních kostí

Quintessenz. 2019 ; 28 (1) : 38-46.

Quintessenz (Praha)
ISSN 1210-017X
Medvik
Zdroj

Klíčová slova
nekróza čelistních kostí,
MeSH
čelisti * patologie MeSH
inhibitory angiogeneze škodlivé účinky MeSH
inhibitory kostní resorpce škodlivé účinky MeSH
lidé MeSH
nekróza * chemicky indukované MeSH
nežádoucí účinky léčiv MeSH
retrospektivní studie MeSH
Check Tag
lidé MeSH

Článek

Observed benefit and safety of aflibercept in elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: An age-based analysis from the randomized placebo-controlled phase III VELOUR trial

Journal of geriatric oncology. 2018 ; 9 (1) : 32-39. [pub] 20170812

J Geriatr Oncol
ISSN 1879-4076
Medvik
Zdroj

OBJECTIVES: Aflibercept (ziv-aflibercept) significantly improves progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) when added to 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and irinotecan (FOLFIRI), compared with FOLFIRI alone, in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer previously treated with oxaliplatin-based therapy. This subset analysis of the VELOUR study investigates aflibercept plus FOLFIRI versus placebo plus FOLFIRI according to age. METHODS: Efficacy and safety were analyzed by treatment arm and age (≥ or <65years). RESULTS: Overall, 443 patients were ≥65years old (205 in aflibercept arm; 238 in placebo arm) and 783 were <65years old (407 in aflibercept arm; 376 in placebo arm). Median OS was 12.6 versus 11.3months (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.85; 95.34% CI 0.68-1.07) in patients ≥65years old and 14.5 versus 12.5months (HR: 0.80; 95.34% CI 0.67-0.95) in those patients <65years old, for patients receiving FOLFIRI plus aflibercept or placebo, respectively. There was no interaction between treatment and age. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were comparable for patients <65years and ≥65years old. The incidence of grade 3/4 AEs was higher for patients ≥65years old than for those <65years old in both the aflibercept (89.3% versus 80.5%) and placebo (67.4% versus 59.4%) arms. Interaction tests for grade 3/4 antiangiogenic agent-related AEs suggested no heterogeneity between the older and younger patient populations (p>0.1). CONCLUSION: A limited but consistent benefit on both OS and PFS was associated with the addition of aflibercept to FOLFIRI compared with placebo in patients <65 and ≥65years old, with a marked but manageable increase in the toxicity profile in older patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.govNCT00561470.

Článek

Pazopanib for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Registry-based Analysis of 426 Patients

Anticancer research. 2018 ; 38 (1) : 449-456.

Anticancer Res
ISSN 1791-7530
Medvik
Zdroj

BACKGROUND: Pazopanib is approved for the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). The present study was a retrospective registry-based analysis of 426 patients with mRCC treated with pazopanib as first-line targeted therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The data were obtained from the Renal Cell Carcinoma Information system registry. Patient baseline parameters, treatment course and outcomes, and toxicity were analysed. RESULTS: Median progression-free and overall survival were 12.9 (95% confidence interval(CI)=11.0-14.8) months and 33.2 (95% CI=29.9-36.4) months, respectively. Overall response rate and disease control rate were 25.1% and 57.4%, respectively. Adverse events led to discontinuation of treatment in 37 (12.1%) patients. CONCLUSION: The results confirm that pazopanib is an effective and safe first-line targeted treatment in patients with mRCC. Both the International mRCC Database Consortium and the Memorial Sloan Kettering models were valid predictors of prognosis and nephrectomy was associated with improved survival.

Článek

Randomized Phase III Trial of Adjuvant Pazopanib Versus Placebo After Nephrectomy in Patients With Localized or Locally Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma

Journal of clinical oncology. 2017 ; 35 (35) : 3916-3923. [pub] 20170913

J. clin. Oncol.
ISSN 1527-7755
Medvik
Zdroj

Purpose This phase III trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of pazopanib versus placebo in patients with locally advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) at high risk for relapse after nephrectomy. Patients and Methods A total of 1,538 patients with resected pT2 (high grade) or ≥ pT3, including N1, clear cell RCC were randomly assigned to pazopanib or placebo for 1 year; 403 patients received a starting dose of 800 mg or placebo. To address toxicity attrition, the 800-mg starting dose was lowered to 600 mg, and the primary end point analysis was changed to disease-free survival (DFS) for pazopanib 600 mg versus placebo (n = 1,135). Primary analysis was performed after 350 DFS events in the intent-to-treat (ITT) pazopanib 600 mg group (ITT600mg), and DFS follow-up analysis was performed 12 months later. Secondary end point analyses included DFS with ITT pazopanib 800 mg (ITT800mg) and safety. Results The primary analysis results of DFS ITT600mg favored pazopanib but did not show a significant improvement over placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.06; P = .165). The secondary analysis of DFS in ITT800mg (n = 403) yielded an HR of 0.69 (95% CI, 0.51 to 0.94). Follow-up analysis in ITT600mg yielded an HR of 0.94 (95% CI, 0.77 to 1.14). Increased ALT and AST were common adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation in the pazopanib 600 mg (ALT, 16%; AST, 5%) and 800 mg (ALT, 18%; AST, 7%) groups. Conclusion The results of the primary DFS analysis of pazopanib 600 mg showed no benefit over placebo in the adjuvant setting.

Kolekce

Publikováno

Filtry

* Zobrazit nápovědu

* Zobrazit nápovědu

Upřesnit dle MeSH