Monotherapy or Polytherapy for First-Line Treatment of SE?

Status epilepticus (SE) is one of the most frequent neurologic emergencies, and a rapid and effective treatment is warranted. Current guidelines recommend a stepwise approach using a sequence of different antiepileptic drugs with benzodiazepines (BZD) being the first treatment proposed. To provide the more effective treatment as soon as possible, some authors have suggested using a combined polytherapy as first-line treatment. Strong evidence supports the use of benzodiazepines, mostly lorazepam and midazolam as initial monotherapy treatment for SE. Insufficient data are available to support the use of nonsedating antiepileptic drugs as phenytoin, valproic acid, or levetiracetam without a previous benzodiazepine administration. Studies assessing the role of a combined initial therapy are rare, if not missing. Moreover, owing the wide range of SE etiologies, a "one fits all" initial polytherapy seems difficult to achieve. After reviewing the available evidence, guidelines, and current practices regarding monotherapy and polytherapy as first-line treatment in SE in adults, the authors propose a rational algorithm for early antiseizure treatment in SE.

"Hit the primary": A paradigm shift in the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer?

Patients with metastatic prostate cancer (PC) represent a heterogeneous group with survival rates varying between 13 and 75 months. The current standard treatment in this setting is hormonal therapy, with or without docetaxel-based chemotherapy. In the era of individualized medicine, however, maximizing treatment options, especially in long-term surviving patients with limited disease burden, is of capital importance. Emerging data, mainly from retrospective surgical series, show survival benefits in men diagnosed with metastatic PC following definitive therapy for the prostate. Whether the irradiation of primary tumor in a metastatic disease might improve the therapeutic ratio in association with systemic treatments remains investigational. In this scenario, modern radiation therapy (RT) can play a significant role owing to its intrinsic capability to act as a more general immune response modifier, as well as to the potentially better toxicity profile compared to surgery. Preclinical data, clinical experience, and challenges in local treatment in de novo metastatic PC are reviewed and discussed.

Variation in treatment strategies of Swiss general practitioners for subclinical hypothyroidism in older adults.

QUESTIONS UNDER STUDY: As the best management of subclinical hypothyroidism is controversial, we aimed to assess variations in treatment strategies depending on different Swiss regions, physician and patient characteristics. METHODS: We performed a case-based survey among general practitioners (GPs) in different Swiss regions, which consisted of eight hypothetical cases presenting a female patient with subclinical hypothyroidism and nonspecific complaints differing by age, vitality status and thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) concentration. RESULTS: A total of 262 GPs participated in the survey. There was considerable variation in the levothyroxine starting dose chosen by GPs, ranging from 25 µg to 100 µg. Across the Swiss regions, GPs in the Bern region were significantly more inclined to treat, with a higher probability of initiating treatment (60%, p = 0.01) and higher mean starting doses (45 µg, p <0.01) compared with the French-speaking region (44%, 36 µg); the Zurich region had intermediate values (52%, 39 µg). We found no association between treatment rate and other physician characteristics. GPs were more reluctant to initiate treatment in 85-year-old than in 70-year-old women (odds ratio [OR] 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63-0.94), and more likely to treat women with a TSH of 15 mU/l than those with a TSH of 6mU/l (OR 8.71, 95% CI 6.21-12.20). CONCLUSIONS: There are strong variations in treatment strategies for elderly patients with subclinical hypothyroidism across different Swiss regions, including use of higher starting doses than the recommended 25 µg in the Swiss guidelines, which recommend a starting dose of 25 µg. These variations likely reflect the current uncertainty about the benefits of treatment, which arise from the current lack of evidence from adequately powered clinical trials.

The updated Swiss guidelines 2016 for the treatment and follow-up of cutaneous melanoma.

Cutaneous melanoma is the most deadly cutaneous neoplasm. In order to guide treatment decisions and follow-up of melanoma patients, guidelines for the management of melanoma in Switzerland were inaugurated in 2001 and revised in 2006 and 2016. Recent data on surgical and medical treatments from randomised trials necessitated modification of the treatment and follow-up recommendations.

Cost-effectiveness of Tenofovir / Emtricitabine / Efavirenz versus Zidovudine / Lamivudine / Efavirenz as fist-line regimens for the treatment of HIV-infected patients in low-income settings

The Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy (HAART) is the combination of at least three antiretroviral compounds. The combination purpose is to reduce the likelihood of drug resistance. However in the long-term the resistance to the first-line combination occurs and leads to treatment failure. Thus, a second-line and even a third-line regimen are recommended in the long run. [...] [P. 5] The two treatment alternatives under comparison: Tenofovir (300 mg) CO-formulated with Emtricitabine (200 mg) and Efavirenz (600 mg) currently known under the brand name Atripla (R) was introduced in July 2006 in the United States market. The excellent safety profile and ease of use make this combination a perfect first-line regimen in low-income settings. Therefore, this treatment option was recommended in WHO 2006 reviewed guidelines. Unfortunately, Tenofovir and Emtricitabine compounds are still costly and not yet widely available. For a matter of simplification this regimen is referred in this report as "the recent" therapy. Initially, we had in mind to consider the most frequently used first-line regimen in low-income countries (Stavudine / Larnivudme / Nevirapine) as a comparator for this economic evaluation. Unfortunately, according to the literature review results (see Annex 3); there was no data available comparing head to head the effectiveness of this regimen with the recent one. Instead, we selected a less frequently but commonly used first-line regimen in low-income countries as a comparator: Zidovudine, Lamivudine, Efavirenz. This combination has extensive experience in durability, safety and toxicity and seems to be an optimal choice for a first-line regimen according to the clinical trial group 384 team. Furthermore, Zidovudine, one of the compounds of this combination is now recommended as one of the preferred NNRTI [Non Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors] options to be considered by countries instead of Stavudine (the most used NNRTI in limited-income countries). As this combination has been included in the WHO guidelines as a first-line therapy since 2003 when WHO launched the "3 by 5" scaling-up initiative, this combination of drugs is referred in this report as the "old" therapy. Objectives: The primary objective of this economic evaluation is to compare the two first-line HAARTs introduced above, in a low-income setting context. Both of these combinations are recommended by the 2006 WHO guidelines as potential first-line regimens. The secondary objective is to provide a simplified and comprehensible cost-effectiveness modeling tool in order to help policy makers, in resource-limited settings, make decisions about which first-line HAART to fund using the scarce resources available. [P. 6-7]

The forced adoption of a fast-track appraisal process for a breast cancer treatment in UK

Trastuzumab (Herceptin ®, Roche) is approved in UK for the treatment of the metastatic breast cancer since 2001. As of 2005, concomitantly with the publication of 3 studies that showed it produces a 50% reduction of the recurrence rates of breast cancer, trastuzumab started to be prescribed in the earlt adjuvant treatrnent of this disease. Und June 2006, trastuzumab did not have both: 1) regulatory approval and 2) NICE [National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence] recommendation for the use in early stages of breast cancer. During the period until June 2006, the trastuzumab use in those patients was not reimbursed and because the cost of trastuzumab is equal with the yearly UK average income, most of patients could not self fund their treatrnent. Before the publication of the final NICE guidance, the new data of trastuzumab in early breast cancer raised enormous patient and professional interest and expectations. A great volume of public and professional pressure was generated to transcend a system by which Primary Care Trusts can reimburse a treatment only after a formal guidance was issued. This paper draw on a case study depicting and analyzing the process by which regulatory approval and NICE recommendations were achieved in a record time and how trastuzumab became a standard treatment on early adjuvant breast cancer. According to the data we gathered in this work we were witnessing one of the fastest processes of adoption of a health care technology since the creation of NICE, in 1999. This study addresses the following research question: How and why does the adoption pattern of trastuzumab differ from the rational decision-making model of the reimbursement process in UK? [Author, p. 4]