Addition of docetaxel, zoledronic acid, or both to first-line long-term hormone therapy in prostate cancer (STAMPEDE): survival results from an adaptive, multiarm, multistage, platform randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND Long-term hormone therapy has been the standard of care for advanced prostate cancer since the 1940s. STAMPEDE is a randomised controlled trial using a multiarm, multistage platform design. It recruits men with high-risk, locally advanced, metastatic or recurrent prostate cancer who are starting first-line long-term hormone therapy. We report primary survival results for three research comparisons testing the addition of zoledronic acid, docetaxel, or their combination to standard of care versus standard of care alone. METHODS Standard of care was hormone therapy for at least 2 years; radiotherapy was encouraged for men with N0M0 disease to November, 2011, then mandated; radiotherapy was optional for men with node-positive non-metastatic (N+M0) disease. Stratified randomisation (via minimisation) allocated men 2:1:1:1 to standard of care only (SOC-only; control), standard of care plus zoledronic acid (SOC + ZA), standard of care plus docetaxel (SOC + Doc), or standard of care with both zoledronic acid and docetaxel (SOC + ZA + Doc). Zoledronic acid (4 mg) was given for six 3-weekly cycles, then 4-weekly until 2 years, and docetaxel (75 mg/m(2)) for six 3-weekly cycles with prednisolone 10 mg daily. There was no blinding to treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was overall survival. Pairwise comparisons of research versus control had 90% power at 2·5% one-sided α for hazard ratio (HR) 0·75, requiring roughly 400 control arm deaths. Statistical analyses were undertaken with standard log-rank-type methods for time-to-event data, with hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs derived from adjusted Cox models. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00268476) and ControlledTrials.com (ISRCTN78818544). FINDINGS 2962 men were randomly assigned to four groups between Oct 5, 2005, and March 31, 2013. Median age was 65 years (IQR 60-71). 1817 (61%) men had M+ disease, 448 (15%) had N+/X M0, and 697 (24%) had N0M0. 165 (6%) men were previously treated with local therapy, and median prostate-specific antigen was 65 ng/mL (IQR 23-184). Median follow-up was 43 months (IQR 30-60). There were 415 deaths in the control group (347 [84%] prostate cancer). Median overall survival was 71 months (IQR 32 to not reached) for SOC-only, not reached (32 to not reached) for SOC + ZA (HR 0·94, 95% CI 0·79-1·11; p=0·450), 81 months (41 to not reached) for SOC + Doc (0·78, 0·66-0·93; p=0·006), and 76 months (39 to not reached) for SOC + ZA + Doc (0·82, 0·69-0·97; p=0·022). There was no evidence of heterogeneity in treatment effect (for any of the treatments) across prespecified subsets. Grade 3-5 adverse events were reported for 399 (32%) patients receiving SOC, 197 (32%) receiving SOC + ZA, 288 (52%) receiving SOC + Doc, and 269 (52%) receiving SOC + ZA + Doc. INTERPRETATION Zoledronic acid showed no evidence of survival improvement and should not be part of standard of care for this population. Docetaxel chemotherapy, given at the time of long-term hormone therapy initiation, showed evidence of improved survival accompanied by an increase in adverse events. Docetaxel treatment should become part of standard of care for adequately fit men commencing long-term hormone therapy. FUNDING Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis, Pfizer, Janssen, Astellas, NIHR Clinical Research Network, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research.

Patient safety in dialysis access

Not only are dialysis access creation and maintenance prone to complications, but patients suffering from end-stage renal disease and its comorbidities generally have a high risk of adverse events during their continuous treatment. Preventive strategies are key to avoid harm and to improve the outcome of the treatment of the growing number of patients with chronic kidney failure, especially as doctors and nurses are not always aware of the consequences of unsafe behavior. This publication is intended for health care professionals – nurses as well as doctors – and aims to raise the awareness of patient safety aspects, combining medical education with evidence-based medicine. After a general overview of the topic, an international panel of authors provides a diversified insight into important concepts and technical tricks essential to create and maintain a functional dialysis access. Contributions to Nephrology, Vol. 184

Long-term ticagrelor monotherapy versus standard dual antiplatelet therapy followed by aspirin monotherapy in patients undergoing biolimus-eluting stent implantation: rationale and design of the GLOBAL LEADERS trial

AIMS The GLOBAL LEADERS trial is a superiority study in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, with a uniform use of Biolimus A9-eluting stents (BES) and bivalirudin. GLOBAL LEADERS was designed to assess whether a 24-month antithrombotic regimen with ticagrelor and one month of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), compared to conventional dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), improves outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS Patients (n >16,000) are randomised (1:1 ratio) to ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily for 24 months plus ASA ≤100 mg for one month versus DAPT with either ticagrelor (acute coronary syndrome) or clopidogrel (stable coronary artery disease) for 12 months plus ASA ≤100 mg for 24 months. The primary outcome is a composite of all-cause mortality or non-fatal, new Q-wave myocardial infarction at 24 months. The key safety endpoint is investigator-reported class 3 or 5 bleeding according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) definitions. Sensitivity analysis will be carried out to explore potential differences in outcome across geographic regions and according to specific angiographic and clinical risk estimates. CONCLUSIONS The GLOBAL LEADERS trial aims to assess the role of ticagrelor as a single antiplatelet agent after a short course of DAPT for the long-term prevention of cardiac adverse events, across a wide spectrum of patients, following BES implantation.

Stable coronary artery disease: revascularisation and invasive strategies

Stable coronary artery disease is the most common clinical manifestation of ischaemic heart disease and a leading cause of mortality worldwide. Myocardial revascularisation is a mainstay in the treatment of symptomatic patients or those with ischaemia-producing coronary lesions, and reduces ischaemia to a greater extent than medical treatment. Documentation of ischaemia and plaque burden is fundamental in the risk stratification of patients with stable coronary artery disease, and several invasive and non-invasive techniques are available (eg, fractional flow reserve or intravascular ultrasound) or being validated (eg, instantaneous wave-free ratio and optical coherence tomography). The use of new-generation drug-eluting stents and arterial conduits greatly improve clinical outcome in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). PCI is feasible, safe, and effective in many patients with stable coronary artery disease who remain symptomatic despite medical treatment. In patients with multivessel and left main coronary artery disease, the decision between PCI or CABG is guided by the local Heart Team (team of different cardiovascular specialists, including non-invasive and invasive cardiologists, and cardiac surgeons), who carefully judge the possible benefits and risks inherent to PCI and CABG. In specific subsets, such as patients with diabetes and advanced, multivessel coronary artery disease, CABG remains the standard of care in view of improved protection against recurrent ischaemic adverse events.

Republished: Antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention of coronary artery disease

The choice and duration of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention of coronary artery disease (CAD) is determined by the clinical context and treatment strategy. Oral antiplatelet agents for secondary prevention include the cyclo-oxygenase-1 inhibitor aspirin, and the ADP dependent P2Y12 inhibitors clopidogrel, prasugrel and ticagrelor. Aspirin constitutes the cornerstone in secondary prevention of CAD and is complemented by clopidogrel in patients with stable CAD undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Among patients with acute coronary syndrome, prasugrel and ticagrelor improve net clinical outcome by reducing ischaemic adverse events at the expense of an increased risk of bleeding as compared with clopidogrel. Prasugrel appears particularly effective among patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction to reduce the risk of stent thrombosis compared with clopidogrel, and offered a greater net clinical benefit among patients with diabetes compared with patients without diabetes. Ticagrelor is associated with reduced mortality without increasing the rate of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG)-related bleeding as compared with clopidogrel. Dual antiplatelet therapy should be continued for a minimum of 1 year among patients with acute coronary syndrome irrespective of stent type; among patients with stable CAD treated with new generation drug-eluting stents, available data suggest no benefit to prolong antiplatelet treatment beyond 6 months.

Development of an Interleukin-1β Vaccine in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Interleukin-1β (IL-1β) is a key cytokine involved in inflammatory illnesses including rare hereditary diseases and common chronic inflammatory conditions as gout, rheumatoid arthritis, and type 2 diabetes mellitus, suggesting reduction of IL-1β activity as new treatment strategy. The objective of our study was to assess safety, antibody response, and preliminary efficacy of a novel vaccine against IL-1β. The vaccine hIL1bQb consisting of full-length, recombinant IL-1β coupled to virus-like particles was tested in a preclinical and clinical, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study in patients with type 2 diabetes. The preclinical simian study showed prompt induction of IL-1β-specific antibodies upon vaccination, while neutralizing antibodies appeared with delay. In the clinical study with 48 type 2 diabetic patients, neutralizing IL-1β-specific antibody responses were detectable after six injections with doses of 900 µg. The development of neutralizing antibodies was associated with higher number of study drug injections, lower baseline body mass index, improvement of glycemia, and C-reactive protein (CRP). The vaccine hIL1bQb was safe and well-tolerated with no differences regarding adverse events between patients receiving hIL1bQb compared to placebo. This is the first description of a vaccine against IL-1β and represents a new treatment option for IL-1β-dependent diseases such as type 2 diabetes mellitus (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00924105).Molecular Therapy (2016); doi:10.1038/mt.2015.227.

First-in-Human Proof-of-Concept Study: Intralesional Administration of BQ788, an Endothelin Receptor B Antagonist, to Melanoma Skin Metastases

BACKGROUND This first-in-human proof-of-concept study aimed to check whether safety and preclinical results obtained by intratumoral administration of BQ788, an endothelin receptor B (EDNRB) antagonist, can be repeated in human melanoma patients. METHODS Three patients received a single intralesional BQ788 application of 3 mg. After 3-7 days, the lesions were measured and removed for analysis. The administered dose was increased to a cumulative dosage of 8 mg in patient 4 (4 × 2.0 mg, days 0-3; lesion removed on day 4) and to 10 mg in patient 5 (3 × 3.3 mg, days 0, 3, and 10; lesion removed after 14 days). Control lesions were simultaneously treated with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS). All samples were processed and analyzed without knowledge of the clinical findings. RESULTS No statistical evaluation was possible because of the number of patients (n = 5) and the variability in the mode of administration. No adverse events were observed, regardless of administered dose. All observations were in accordance with results obtained in preclinical studies. Accordingly, no difference in degree of tumor necrosis was detected between BQ788- and PBS-treated samples. In addition, both EDNRB and Ki67 showed decreased expression in patients 2 and 5 and, to a lesser extent, in patient 1. Similarly, decreased expression of EDNRB mRNA in patients 2 and 5 and of BCL2A1 and/or PARP3 in patients 2, 3, and 5 was found. Importantly, semiquantitatively scored immunohistochemistry for CD31 and CD3 revealed more blood vessels and lymphocytes, respectively, in BQ788-treated tumors of patients 2 and 4. Also, in all patients, we observed inverse correlation in expression levels between EDNRB and HIF1A. Finally, in patient 5 (the only patient treated for longer than 1 week), we observed inhibition in lesion growth, as shown by size measurement. CONCLUSION The intralesional applications of BQ788 were well tolerated and showed signs of directly and indirectly reducing the viability of melanoma cells.

The effect of 8 or 5 years of denosumab treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: results from the FREEDOM Extension study

UNLABELLED The FREEDOM study and its Extension provide long-term information about the effects of denosumab for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Treatment for up to 8 years was associated with persistent reduction of bone turnover, continued increases in bone mineral density, low fracture incidence, and a favorable benefit/risk profile. INTRODUCTION This study aims to report the results through year 5 of the FREEDOM Extension study, representing up to 8 years of continued denosumab treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. METHODS Women who completed the 3-year FREEDOM study were eligible to enter the 7-year open-label FREEDOM Extension in which all participants are scheduled to receive denosumab, since placebo assignment was discontinued for ethical reasons. A total of 4550 women enrolled in the Extension (2343 long-term; 2207 cross-over). In this analysis, women in the long-term and cross-over groups received denosumab for up to 8 and 5 years, respectively. RESULTS Throughout the Extension, sustained reduction of bone turnover markers (BTMs) was observed in both groups. In the long-term group, mean bone mineral density (BMD) continued to increase significantly at each time point measured, for cumulative 8-year gains of 18.4 and 8.3 % at the lumbar spine and total hip, respectively. In the cross-over group, mean BMD increased significantly from the Extension baseline for 5-year cumulative gains of 13.1 and 6.2 % at the lumbar spine and total hip, respectively. The yearly incidence of new vertebral and nonvertebral fractures remained low in both groups. The incidence of adverse and serious adverse events did not increase over time. Through Extension year 5, eight events of osteonecrosis of the jaw and two events of atypical femoral fracture were confirmed. CONCLUSIONS Denosumab treatment for up to 8 years was associated with persistent reductions of BTMs, continued BMD gains, low fracture incidence, and a consistent safety profile.

Efficacy, Acceptability, and Tolerability of Antipsychotics in Treatment-Resistant Schizophrenia: A Network Meta-analysis.

Importance In treatment-resistant schizophrenia, clozapine is considered the standard treatment. However, clozapine use has restrictions owing to its many adverse effects. Moreover, an increasing number of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of other antipsychotics have been published. Objective To integrate all the randomized evidence from the available antipsychotics used for treatment-resistant schizophrenia by performing a network meta-analysis. Data Sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, Biosis, PsycINFO, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, World Health Organization International Trial Registry, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched up to June 30, 2014. Study Selection At least 2 independent reviewers selected published and unpublished single- and double-blind RCTs in treatment-resistant schizophrenia (any study-defined criterion) that compared any antipsychotic (at any dose and in any form of administration) with another antipsychotic or placebo. Data Extraction and Synthesis At least 2 independent reviewers extracted all data into standard forms and assessed the quality of all included trials with the Cochrane Collaboration's risk-of-bias tool. Data were pooled using a random-effects model in a Bayesian setting. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was efficacy as measured by overall change in symptoms of schizophrenia. Secondary outcomes included change in positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia, categorical response to treatment, dropouts for any reason and for inefficacy of treatment, and important adverse events. Results Forty blinded RCTs with 5172 unique participants (71.5% men; mean [SD] age, 38.8 [3.7] years) were included in the analysis. Few significant differences were found in all outcomes. In the primary outcome (reported as standardized mean difference; 95% credible interval), olanzapine was more effective than quetiapine (-0.29; -0.56 to -0.02), haloperidol (-0. 29; -0.44 to -0.13), and sertindole (-0.46; -0.80 to -0.06); clozapine was more effective than haloperidol (-0.22; -0.38 to -0.07) and sertindole (-0.40; -0.74 to -0.04); and risperidone was more effective than sertindole (-0.32; -0.63 to -0.01). A pattern of superiority for olanzapine, clozapine, and risperidone was seen in other efficacy outcomes, but results were not consistent and effect sizes were usually small. In addition, relatively few RCTs were available for antipsychotics other than clozapine, haloperidol, olanzapine, and risperidone. The most surprising finding was that clozapine was not significantly better than most other drugs. Conclusions and Relevance Insufficient evidence exists on which antipsychotic is more efficacious for patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia, and blinded RCTs-in contrast to unblinded, randomized effectiveness studies-provide little evidence of the superiority of clozapine compared with other second-generation antipsychotics. Future clozapine studies with high doses and patients with extremely treatment-refractory schizophrenia might be most promising to change the current evidence.

Collaborative Research in Childhood Cancer Survivorship: The Current Landscape.

Survivors of childhood cancer carry a substantial burden of morbidity and are at increased risk for premature death. Furthermore, clear associations exist between specific therapeutic exposures and the risk for a variety of long-term complications. The entire landscape of health issues encountered for decades after successful completion of treatment is currently being explored in various collaborative research settings. These settings include large population-based or multi-institutional cohorts and single-institution studies. The ascertainment of outcomes has depended on self-reporting, linkage to registries, or clinical assessments. Survivorship research in the cooperative group setting, such as the Children's Oncology Group, has leveraged the clinical trials infrastructure to explore the molecular underpinnings of treatment-related adverse events, and to understand specific complications in the setting of randomized risk-reduction strategies. This review highlights the salient findings from these large collaborative initiatives, emphasizing the need for life-long follow-up of survivors of childhood cancer, and describing the development of several guidelines and efforts toward harmonization. Finally, the review reinforces the need to identify populations at highest risk, facilitating the development of risk prediction models that would allow for targeted interventions across the entire trajectory of survivorship.

Bevacizumab continuation versus no continuation after first-line chemotherapy plus bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase III non-inferiority trial (SAKK 41/06)

BACKGROUND Chemotherapy plus bevacizumab is a standard option for first-line treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. We assessed whether no continuation is non-inferior to continuation of bevacizumab after completing first-line chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS In an open-label, phase III multicentre trial, patients with mCRC without disease progression after 4-6 months of standard first-line chemotherapy plus bevacizumab were randomly assigned to continuing bevacizumab at a standard dose or no treatment. CT scans were done every 6 weeks until disease progression. The primary end point was time to progression (TTP). A non-inferiority limit for hazard ratio (HR) of 0.727 was chosen to detect a difference in TTP of 6 weeks or less, with a one-sided significance level of 10% and a statistical power of 85%. RESULTS The intention-to-treat population comprised 262 patients: median follow-up was 36.7 months. The median TTP was 4.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.1-5.4] months for bevacizumab continuation versus 2.9 (95% CI 2.8-3.8) months for no continuation; HR 0.74 (95% CI 0.58-0.96). Non-inferiority could not be demonstrated. The median overall survival was 25.4 months for bevacizumab continuation versus 23.8 months (HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.63-1.1; P = 0.2) for no continuation. Severe adverse events were uncommon in the bevacizumab continuation arm. Costs for bevacizumab continuation were estimated to be ∼30,000 USD per patient. CONCLUSIONS Non-inferiority could not be demonstrated for treatment holidays versus continuing bevacizumab monotheray, after 4-6 months of standard first-line chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. Based on no impact on overall survival and increased treatment costs, bevacizumab as a single agent is of no meaningful therapeutic value. More efficient treatment approaches are needed to maintain control of stabilized disease following induction therapy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00544700.

Adjunct prednisone therapy for patients with community-acquired pneumonia: a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND Clinical trials yielded conflicting data about the benefit of adding systemic corticosteroids for treatment of community-acquired pneumonia. We assessed whether short-term corticosteroid treatment reduces time to clinical stability in patients admitted to hospital for community-acquired pneumonia. METHODS In this double-blind, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older with community-acquired pneumonia from seven tertiary care hospitals in Switzerland within 24 h of presentation. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to receive either prednisone 50 mg daily for 7 days or placebo. The computer-generated randomisation was done with variable block sizes of four to six and stratified by study centre. The primary endpoint was time to clinical stability defined as time (days) until stable vital signs for at least 24 h, and analysed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00973154. FINDINGS From Dec 1, 2009, to May 21, 2014, of 2911 patients assessed for eligibility, 785 patients were randomly assigned to either the prednisone group (n=392) or the placebo group (n=393). Median time to clinical stability was shorter in the prednisone group (3·0 days, IQR 2·5-3·4) than in the placebo group (4·4 days, 4·0-5·0; hazard ratio [HR] 1·33, 95% CI 1·15-1·50, p<0·0001). Pneumonia-associated complications until day 30 did not differ between groups (11 [3%] in the prednisone group and 22 [6%] in the placebo group; odds ratio [OR] 0·49 [95% CI 0·23-1·02]; p=0·056). The prednisone group had a higher incidence of in-hospital hyperglycaemia needing insulin treatment (76 [19%] vs 43 [11%]; OR 1·96, 95% CI 1·31-2·93, p=0·0010). Other adverse events compatible with corticosteroid use were rare and similar in both groups. INTERPRETATION Prednisone treatment for 7 days in patients with community-acquired pneumonia admitted to hospital shortens time to clinical stability without an increase in complications. This finding is relevant from a patient perspective and an important determinant of hospital costs and efficiency. FUNDING Swiss National Science Foundation, Viollier AG, Nora van Meeuwen Haefliger Stiftung, Julia und Gottfried Bangerter-Rhyner Stiftung.

Treatment for superficial infusion thrombophlebitis of the upper extremity.

BACKGROUND Although superficial thrombophlebitis of the upper extremity represents a frequent complication of intravenous catheters inserted into the peripheral veins of the forearm or hand, no consensus exists on the optimal management of this condition in clinical practice. OBJECTIVES To summarise the evidence from randomised clinical trials (RCTs) concerning the efficacy and safety of (topical, oral or parenteral) medical therapy of superficial thrombophlebitis of the upper extremity. SEARCH METHODS The Cochrane Vascular Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Specialised Register (last searched April 2015) and the Cochrane Register of Studies (2015, Issue 3). Clinical trials registries were searched up to April 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA RCTs comparing any (topical, oral or parenteral) medical treatment to no intervention or placebo, or comparing two different medical interventions (e.g. a different variant scheme or regimen of the same intervention or a different pharmacological type of treatment). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We extracted data on methodological quality, patient characteristics, interventions and outcomes, including improvement of signs and symptoms as the primary effectiveness outcome, and number of participants experiencing side effects of the study treatments as the primary safety outcome. MAIN RESULTS We identified 13 studies (917 participants). The evaluated treatment modalities consisted of a topical treatment (11 studies), an oral treatment (2 studies) and a parenteral treatment (2 studies). Seven studies used a placebo or no intervention control group, whereas all others also or solely compared active treatment groups. No study evaluated the effects of ice or the application of cold or hot bandages. Overall, the risk of bias in individual trials was moderate to high, although poor reporting hampered a full appreciation of the risk in most studies. The overall quality of the evidence for each of the outcomes varied from low to moderate mainly due to risk of bias and imprecision, with only single trials contributing to most comparisons. Data on primary outcomes improvement of signs and symptoms and side effects attributed to the study treatment could not be statistically pooled because of the between-study differences in comparisons, outcomes and type of instruments to measure outcomes.An array of topical treatments, such as heparinoid or diclofenac gels, improved pain compared to placebo or no intervention. Compared to placebo, oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs reduced signs and symptoms intensity. Safety issues were reported sparsely and were not available for some interventions, such as notoginseny creams, parenteral low-molecular-weight heparin or defibrotide. Although several trials reported on adverse events with topical heparinoid creams, Essaven gel or phlebolan versus control, the trials were underpowered to adequately measure any differences between treatment modalities. Where reported, adverse events with topical treatments consisted mainly of local allergic reactions. Only one study of 15 participants assessed thrombus extension and symptomatic venous thromboembolism with either oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or low-molecular-weight heparin, and it reported no cases of either. No study reported on the development of suppurative phlebitis, catheter-related bloodstream infections or quality of life. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The evidence about the treatment of acute infusion superficial thrombophlebitis is limited and of low quality. Data appear too preliminary to assess the effectiveness and safety of topical treatments, systemic anticoagulation or oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

Immune regulatory and neuroprotective properties of preimplantation factor: From newborn to adult.

Embryonic-maternal interaction from the earliest stages of gestation has a key, sustained role in neurologic development, persisting into adulthood. Early adverse events may be detrimental in adulthood. Protective factors present during gestation could significantly impact post-natal therapy. The role of PreImplantation Factor (PIF) within this context is herein examined. Secreted by viable early embryos, PIF establishes effective embryonic-maternal communication and exerts essential trophic and protective roles by reducing oxidative stress and protein misfolding and by blunting the nocive let-7 microRNA related pathway. PIF's effects on systemic immunity lead to comprehensive immune modulation, not immune suppression. We examine PIF's role in protecting embryos from adverse maternal environment, which can lead to neurological disorders that may only manifest post-nataly: Synthetic PIF successfully translates endogenous PIF features in both pregnant and non-pregnant clinically relevant models. Specifically PIF has neuroprotective effects in neonatal prematurity. In adult relapsing-remitting neuroinflammation, PIF reverses advanced paralysis while promoting neurogenesis. PIF reversed Mycobacterium smegmatis induced brain infection. In graft-vs.-host disease, PIF reduced skin ulceration, liver inflammation and colon ulceration while maintaining beneficial anti-cancer, graft-vs.-leukemia effect. Clinical-grade PIF has high-safety profile even at supraphysiological doses. The FDA awarded Fast-Track designation, and university-sponsored clinical trials for autoimmune disorder are ongoing. Altogether, PIF properties point to its determining regulatory role in immunity, inflammation and transplant acceptance. Specific plans for using PIF for the treatment of complex neurological disorders (ie. traumatic brain injury, progressive paralysis), including neuroprotection from newborn to adult, are presented.

Open-label study of faldaprevir plus peginterferon and ribavirin in hepatitis C virus genotype 1-infected patients who failed placebo plus peginterferon and ribavirin.

Faldaprevir, a hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS3/4A protease inhibitor, was evaluated in HCV genotype 1-infected patients who failed peginterferon and ribavirin (PegIFN/RBV) treatment during one of three prior faldaprevir trials. Patients who received placebo plus PegIFN/RBV and had virological failure during a prior trial were enrolled and treated in two cohorts: prior relapsers (n = 43) and prior nonresponders (null responders, partial responders and patients with breakthrough; n = 75). Both cohorts received faldaprevir 240 mg once daily plus PegIFN/RBV for 24 weeks. Prior relapsers with early treatment success (ETS; HCV RNA <25 IU/mL detectable or undetectable at week 4 and <25 IU/mL undetectable at week 8) stopped treatment at week 24. Others received PegIFN/RBV through week 48. The primary efficacy endpoint was sustained virological response (HCV RNA <25 IU/mL undetectable) 12 weeks post treatment (SVR12). More prior nonresponders than prior relapsers had baseline HCV RNA ≥800 000 IU/mL (80% vs 58%) and a non-CC IL28B genotype (91% vs 70%). Rates of SVR12 (95% CI) were 95.3% (89.1, 100.0) among prior relapsers and 54.7% (43.4, 65.9) among prior nonresponders; corresponding ETS rates were 97.7% and 65.3%. Adverse events led to faldaprevir discontinuations in 3% of patients. The most common Division of AIDS Grade ≥2 adverse events were anaemia (13%), nausea (10%) and hyperbilirubinaemia (9%). In conclusion, faldaprevir plus PegIFN/RBV achieved clinically meaningful SVR12 rates in patients who failed PegIFN/RBV in a prior trial, with response rates higher among prior relapsers than among prior nonresponders. The adverse event profile was consistent with the known safety profile of faldaprevir.