Potential strategies for the eradication of multi-drug resistant Gram-negative bacterial infections

Antimicrobial resistance is one of the leading threats to society. The increasing burden of multidrug-resistant Gram-negative infection is particularly concerning as such bacteria are demonstrating resistance to nearly all currently licensed therapies. Various strategies have been hypothesized to treat multidrug-resistant Gram-negative infections including: targeting the Gram-negative outer membrane; neutralization of lipopolysaccharide; inhibition of bacterial efflux pumps and prevention of protein folding. Silver and silver nanoparticles, fusogenic liposomes and nanotubes are potential strategies for extending the activity of licensed, Gram-positive selective, antibiotics to Gram-negatives. This may serve as a strategy to fill the current void in pharmaceutical development in the short term. This review outlines the most promising strategies that could be implemented to solve the threat of multidrug-resistant Gram-negative infections

The association between anticholinergic medication burden and health related outcomes in the ‘oldest old’: A systematic review of the literature

Background: Increased exposure to anticholinergic medication is problematic, particularly in those aged 80 years and older.

Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to identify tools used to quantify anticholinergic medication burden and determine the most appropriate tool for use in longitudinal research, conducted in those aged 80 years and older.

Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted across six electronic databases to identify existing tools. Data extraction was conducted independently by two researchers; studies describing the development of each tool were also retrieved and relevant data extracted. An assessment of quality was completed for all studies. Tools were assessed in terms of their measurement of the association between anticholinergic medication burden and a defined set of clinical outcomes, their development and their suitability for use in longitudinal research; the latter was evaluated on the basis of criteria defined as the key attributes of an ideal anticholinergic risk tool.

Results: In total, 807 papers were retrieved, 13 studies were eligible for inclusion and eight tools were identified. Included studies were classed as ‘very good’ or ‘good’ following the quality assessment analysis; one study was unclassified. Anticholinergic medication burden as measured in studies was associated with impaired cognitive and physical function, as well as an increased frequency of falls. The Drug Burden Index (DBI) exhibited most of the key attributes of an ideal anticholinergic risk tool.

Conclusion: This review identified the DBI as the most appropriate tool for use in longitudinal research focused on older people and their exposure to anticholinergic medication burden.

Minimally invasive microneedles for ocular drug delivery

Introduction: Anterior and posterior segment eye diseases are highly challenging to treat, due to the barrier properties and relative inaccessibility of the ocular tissues. Topical eye drops and systemically delivered treatments result in low bioavailability. Alternatively, direct injection of medication into the ocular tissues is clinically employed to overcome the barrier properties, but injections cause significant tissue damage and are associated with a number of untoward side effects and poor patient compliance. Microneedles (MNs) has been recently introduced as a minimally invasive means for localizing drug formulation within the target ocular tissues with greater precision and accuracy than the hypodermic needles.  Areas covered: This review article seeks to provide an overview of a range of challenges that are often faced to achieve efficient ocular drug levels within targeted tissue(s) of the eye. It also describes the problems encountered using conventional hypodermic needle-based ocular injections for anterior and posterior segment drug delivery. It discusses research carried out in the field of MNs, to date.
Expert opinion: MNs can aid in localization of drug delivery systems within the selected ocular tissue. And, hold the potential to revolutionize the way drug formulations are administered to the eye. However, the current limitations and challenges of MNs application warrant further research in this field to enable its widespread clinical application.  

Review of virtual power plant applications for the power system management and V2G market development

Utilization of renewable energy sources and energy storage systems is increasing with fostering new policies on energy industries. However, the increase of distributed generation hinders the reliability of power systems. In order to stabilize them, a virtual power plant emerges as a novel power grid management system. The VPP has a role to make a participation of different distributed energy resources and energy storage systems. This paper defines core technology of the VPP which are demand response and ancillary service concerning about Korea, America and Europe cases. It also suggests application solutions of the VPP to V2G market for restructuring national power industries in Korea.

Cabazitaxel for Hormone-Relapsed Metastatic Prostate Cancer Previously Treated With a Docetaxel-Containing Regimen: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

As part of its single technology appraisal (STA) process, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited the company that manufactures cabazitaxel (Jevtana(®), Sanofi, UK) to submit evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of cabazitaxel for treatment of patients with metastatic hormone-relapsed prostate cancer (mHRPC) previously treated with a docetaxel-containing regimen. The School of Health and Related Research Technology Appraisal Group at the University of Sheffield was commissioned to act as the independent Evidence Review Group (ERG). The ERG produced a critical review of the evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of the technology based upon the company's submission to NICE. Clinical evidence for cabazitaxel was derived from a multinational randomised open-label phase III trial (TROPIC) of cabazitaxel plus prednisone or prednisolone compared with mitoxantrone plus prednisone or prednisolone, which was assumed to represent best supportive care. The NICE final scope identified a further three comparators: abiraterone in combination with prednisone or prednisolone; enzalutamide; and radium-223 dichloride for the subgroup of people with bone metastasis only (no visceral metastasis). The company did not consider radium-223 dichloride to be a relevant comparator. Neither abiraterone nor enzalutamide has been directly compared in a trial with cabazitaxel. Instead, clinical evidence was synthesised within a network meta-analysis (NMA). Results from TROPIC showed that cabazitaxel was associated with a statistically significant improvement in both overall survival and progression-free survival compared with mitoxantrone. Results from a random-effects NMA, as conducted by the company and updated by the ERG, indicated that there was no statistically significant difference between the three active treatments for both overall survival and progression-free survival. Utility data were not collected as part of the TROPIC trial, and were instead taken from the company's UK early access programme. Evidence on resource use came from the TROPIC trial, supplemented by both expert clinical opinion and a UK clinical audit. List prices were used for mitoxantrone, abiraterone and enzalutamide as directed by NICE, although commercial in-confidence patient-access schemes (PASs) are in place for abiraterone and enzalutamide. The confidential PAS was used for cabazitaxel. Sequential use of the advanced hormonal therapies (abiraterone and enzalutamide) does not usually occur in clinical practice in the UK. Hence, cabazitaxel could be used within two pathways of care: either when an advanced hormonal therapy was used pre-docetaxel, or when one was used post-docetaxel. The company believed that the former pathway was more likely to represent standard National Health Service (NHS) practice, and so their main comparison was between cabazitaxel and mitoxantrone, with effectiveness data from the TROPIC trial. Results of the company's updated cost-effectiveness analysis estimated a probabilistic incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £45,982 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, which the committee considered to be the most plausible value for this comparison. Cabazitaxel was estimated to be both cheaper and more effective than abiraterone. Cabazitaxel was estimated to be cheaper but less effective than enzalutamide, resulting in an ICER of £212,038 per QALY gained for enzalutamide compared with cabazitaxel. The ERG noted that radium-223 is a valid comparator (for the indicated sub-group), and that it may be used in either of the two care pathways. Hence, its exclusion leads to uncertainty in the cost-effectiveness results. In addition, the company assumed that there would be no drug wastage when cabazitaxel was used, with cost-effectiveness results being sensitive to this assumption: modelling drug wastage increased the ICER comparing cabazitaxel with mitoxantrone to over £55,000 per QALY gained. The ERG updated the company's NMA and used a random effects model to perform a fully incremental analysis between cabazitaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide and best supportive care using PASs for abiraterone and enzalutamide. Results showed that both cabazitaxel and abiraterone were extendedly dominated by the combination of best supportive care and enzalutamide. Preliminary guidance from the committee, which included wastage of cabazitaxel, did not recommend its use. In response, the company provided both a further discount to the confidential PAS for cabazitaxel and confirmation from NHS England that it is appropriate to supply and purchase cabazitaxel in pre-prepared intravenous-infusion bags, which would remove the cost of drug wastage. As a result, the committee recommended use of cabazitaxel as a treatment option in people with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 whose disease had progressed during or after treatment with at least 225 mg/m(2) of docetaxel, as long as it was provided at the discount agreed in the PAS and purchased in either pre-prepared intravenous-infusion bags or in vials at a reduced price to reflect the average per-patient drug wastage.