Dapagliflozina

Dapagliflozin is a new oral antidiabetic agent whose mechanism of action increases renal glucose excretion, independently of insulin secretion or insulin action. The efficacy of dapagliflozin is dependent on renal function. The use of dapagliflozin has been licensed to improve glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus as: - monotherapy when diet and exercise alone do not provide adequate glycaemic control in patients for whom the use of metformin is considered inappropriate due to intolerance. - Add-on combination therapy with other glucose-lowering agents including insulin, when these, together with diet and exercise, do not provide adequate glycaemic control. Funding has been restricted to the use of dapagliflozin, prior approval, as dual therapy in combination with metformin. This report aims to assess the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, rate the added therapeutic value of dapagliflozin in type 2 diabetes mellitus and identify its current place in therapy. A systematic literature search was carried out, for the purpose of this evaluation, using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and IDIS databases as well as other secondary sources of evidence-based medicine, therapeutic bulletins and national and international drug agencies. Following the critical reading and analysis of the selected articles, a summary is made out of the scientific evidence available, using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) criteria. Only one randomised clinical trial, out of the ten trials found, was considered to be a suitable comparison (versus a dual therapy in combination with the sulfonylurea glipizide in patients inadequately controlled with metformin, diet and exercise). No trials have evaluated variables of relevance to patients, except for safety variables. The main efficacy variable in the trials was the change from baseline in HbA1c, except for a study which evaluated the change from baseline in total body weight as main variable. Baseline characteristics of the patients enrolled in the trials significantly differ from those of the population with diabetes in our society which tend to be of an older age and have a longer history of type 2 diabetes mellitus. The major limitation of dapagliflozin derives from its mechanism of action, since its efficacy decreases as renal function declines. The use of dapagliflozin is not recommended in patients with moderate to severe renal impairment ((CrCl<60ml/min or GFG <60 ml/min/1.73 m2) nor in elderly patients, in which a decrease in renal function can be expected. The assessment of safety includes the incidence and rate of discontinuations due to adverse events, episodes of hypoglycaemia, signs or symptoms of genital and urinary tract infections, dehydration, hypovolaemia and hypotension. Further pharmacoepidemiological studies are to be carried out to clarify the long-term effects of dapagliflozin on renal function and the potential effect in the development of breast and bladder tumours. Dapagliflozin as monotherapy has not been evaluated against adequate comparators (sulfonylureas, pioglitazone, gliptins). In combination therapy with metformin, the efficacy of dapagliflozin was shown to be non-inferior to glipizide plus metformin, resulting in a mean reduction of 0.52% in HbA1c, with a difference of 0.00 among both groups (95% CI: -0.11 a 0.11). There are no comparative data against other second-line treatment options. As shown in the studies, the overall incidence of adverse events with dapagliflozin as monotherapy (21.5%) was similar to that observed with placebo, and greater to that observed with metformin (15.4%). Hypoglycaemia of any type was the adverse event more frequently reported. The incidence of severe hypoglycaemic events observed in most of the studies was low. The overall incidence of adverse events observed in the study that compared dapagliflozin+metformin against glipizide+metformin was similar for both groups (27%) and incidence of hypoglycaemic events with dapagliflozin (3.5%) was significantly lower to that observed with glipizide (40.8%). Reductions of body weight of about 2 to 3 kg and a slight decrease in blood pressure (1 to 5 mmHg) have been observed in all studies in the groups treated with dapagliflozin together with diet and exercise. Dosing scheme (every 24 hours) is similar to other oral antidiabetic agents and its cost is similar to that for gliptines and higher to that for sulfonylureas or generic pioglitazone. Funding has been limited to the use of dapagliflozin as dual therapy regimen in combination with metformin as an option for patients with contraindication or intolerance to sulfonylureas, such a those experiencing frequent hypoglycaemic events, weight loss associated risks, as long as they are under 75 years of age and have no moderate to severe renal impairment. In the light of the above, we consider dapagliflozin means no therapeutic innovation in the therapy of type 2 diabetes mellitus over other therapeutic alternatives available.

Combined vemurafenib and cobimetinib in BRAF-mutated melanoma.

BACKGROUND The combined inhibition of BRAF and MEK is hypothesized to improve clinical outcomes in patients with melanoma by preventing or delaying the onset of resistance observed with BRAF inhibitors alone. This randomized phase 3 study evaluated the combination of the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib and the MEK inhibitor cobimetinib. METHODS We randomly assigned 495 patients with previously untreated unresectable locally advanced or metastatic BRAF V600 mutation-positive melanoma to receive vemurafenib and cobimetinib (combination group) or vemurafenib and placebo (control group). The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. RESULTS The median progression-free survival was 9.9 months in the combination group and 6.2 months in the control group (hazard ratio for death or disease progression, 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39 to 0.68; P<0.001). The rate of complete or partial response in the combination group was 68%, as compared with 45% in the control group (P<0.001), including rates of complete response of 10% in the combination group and 4% in the control group. Progression-free survival as assessed by independent review was similar to investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Interim analyses of overall survival showed 9-month survival rates of 81% (95% CI, 75 to 87) in the combination group and 73% (95% CI, 65 to 80) in the control group. Vemurafenib and cobimetinib was associated with a nonsignificantly higher incidence of adverse events of grade 3 or higher, as compared with vemurafenib and placebo (65% vs. 59%), and there was no significant difference in the rate of study-drug discontinuation. The number of secondary cutaneous cancers decreased with the combination therapy. CONCLUSIONS The addition of cobimetinib to vemurafenib was associated with a significant improvement in progression-free survival among patients with BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma, at the cost of some increase in toxicity. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech; coBRIM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01689519.).

Incidence of HIV-1 drug resistance among antiretroviral treatment-naive individuals starting modern therapy combinations.

BACKGROUND: Estimates of drug resistance incidence to modern first-line combination antiretroviral therapies against human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) type 1 are complicated by limited availability of genotypic drug resistance tests (GRTs) and uncertain timing of resistance emergence. METHODS: Five first-line combinations were studied (all paired with lamivudine or emtricitabine): efavirenz (EFV) plus zidovudine (AZT) (n = 524); EFV plus tenofovir (TDF) (n = 615); lopinavir (LPV) plus AZT (n = 573); LPV plus TDF (n = 301); and ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATZ/r) plus TDF (n = 250). Virological treatment outcomes were classified into 3 risk strata for emergence of resistance, based on whether undetectable HIV RNA levels were maintained during therapy and, if not, whether viral loads were >500 copies/mL during treatment. Probabilities for presence of resistance mutations were estimated from GRTs (n = 2876) according to risk stratum and therapy received at time of testing. On the basis of these data, events of resistance emergence were imputed for each individual and were assessed using survival analysis. Imputation was repeated 100 times, and results were summarized by median values (2.5th-97.5th percentile range). RESULTS: Six years after treatment initiation, EFV plus AZT showed the highest cumulative resistance incidence (16%) of all regimens (<11%). Confounder-adjusted Cox regression confirmed that first-line EFV plus AZT (reference) was associated with a higher median hazard for resistance emergence, compared with other treatments: EFV plus TDF (hazard ratio [HR], 0.57; range, 0.42-0.76), LPV plus AZT (HR, 0.63; range, 0.45-0.89), LPV plus TDF (HR, 0.55; range, 0.33-0.83), ATZ/r plus TDF (HR, 0.43; range, 0.17-0.83). Two-thirds of resistance events were associated with detectable HIV RNA level ≤500 copies/mL during treatment, and only one-third with virological failure (HIV RNA level, >500 copies/mL). CONCLUSIONS: The inclusion of TDF instead of AZT and ATZ/r was correlated with lower rates of resistance emergence, most likely because of improved tolerability and pharmacokinetics resulting from a once-daily dosage.

Combined vemurafenib and cobimetinib in BRAF-mutated melanoma.

BACKGROUND The combined inhibition of BRAF and MEK is hypothesized to improve clinical outcomes in patients with melanoma by preventing or delaying the onset of resistance observed with BRAF inhibitors alone. This randomized phase 3 study evaluated the combination of the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib and the MEK inhibitor cobimetinib. METHODS We randomly assigned 495 patients with previously untreated unresectable locally advanced or metastatic BRAF V600 mutation-positive melanoma to receive vemurafenib and cobimetinib (combination group) or vemurafenib and placebo (control group). The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. RESULTS The median progression-free survival was 9.9 months in the combination group and 6.2 months in the control group (hazard ratio for death or disease progression, 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39 to 0.68; P<0.001). The rate of complete or partial response in the combination group was 68%, as compared with 45% in the control group (P<0.001), including rates of complete response of 10% in the combination group and 4% in the control group. Progression-free survival as assessed by independent review was similar to investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Interim analyses of overall survival showed 9-month survival rates of 81% (95% CI, 75 to 87) in the combination group and 73% (95% CI, 65 to 80) in the control group. Vemurafenib and cobimetinib was associated with a nonsignificantly higher incidence of adverse events of grade 3 or higher, as compared with vemurafenib and placebo (65% vs. 59%), and there was no significant difference in the rate of study-drug discontinuation. The number of secondary cutaneous cancers decreased with the combination therapy. CONCLUSIONS The addition of cobimetinib to vemurafenib was associated with a significant improvement in progression-free survival among patients with BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma, at the cost of some increase in toxicity. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech; coBRIM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01689519.).

Fracture risk and zoledronic acid therapy in men with osteoporosis.

BACKGROUND: Fractures in men are a major health issue, and data on the antifracture efficacy of therapies for osteoporosis in men are limited. We studied the effect of zoledronic acid on fracture risk among men with osteoporosis. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned 1199 men with primary or hypogonadism-associated osteoporosis who were 50 to 85 years of age to receive an intravenous infusion of zoledronic acid (5 mg) or placebo at baseline and at 12 months. Participants received daily calcium and vitamin D supplementation. The primary end point was the proportion of participants with one or more new morphometric vertebral fractures over a period of 24 months. RESULTS: The rate of any new morphometric vertebral fracture was 1.6% in the zoledronic acid group and 4.9% in the placebo group over the 24-month period, representing a 67% risk reduction with zoledronic acid (relative risk, 0.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.16 to 0.70; P=0.002). As compared with men who received placebo, men who received zoledronic acid had fewer moderate-to-severe vertebral fractures (P=0.03) and less height loss (P=0.002). Fewer participants who received zoledronic acid had clinical vertebral or nonvertebral fractures, although this difference did not reach significance because of the small number of fractures. Bone mineral density was higher and bone-turnover markers were lower in the men who received zoledronic acid (P<0.05 for both comparisons). Results were similar in men with low serum levels of total testosterone. The zoledronic acid and placebo groups did not differ significantly with respect to the incidence of death (2.6% and 2.9%, respectively) or serious adverse events (25.3% and 25.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Zoledronic acid treatment was associated with a significantly reduced risk of vertebral fracture among men with osteoporosis. (Funded by Novartis Pharma; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00439647.).

Safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary clinical activity of inotuzumab ozogamicin, a novel immunoconjugate for the treatment of B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: results of a phase I study.

PURPOSE Inotuzumab ozogamicin (CMC-544) is an antibody-targeted chemotherapy agent composed of a humanized anti-CD22 antibody conjugated to calicheamicin, a potent cytotoxic agent. This was a phase I study to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and preliminary efficacy of inotuzumab ozogamicin in an expanded MTD cohort of patients with relapsed or refractory CD22(+) B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). PATIENTS AND METHODS Inotuzumab ozogamicin was administered intravenously as a single agent once every 3 or 4 weeks at doses ranging from 0.4 to 2.4 mg/m(2). Outcomes included MTD, safety, pharmacokinetics, response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival. Results Seventy-nine patients were enrolled. The MTD was determined to be 1.8 mg/m(2). Common adverse events at the MTD were thrombocytopenia (90%), asthenia (67%), and nausea and neutropenia (51% each). The objective response rate at the end of treatment was 39% for the 79 enrolled patients, 68% for all patients with follicular NHL treated at the MTD, and 15% for all patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated at the MTD. Median PFS was 317 days (approximately 10.4 months) and 49 days for patients with follicular NHL and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, respectively. CONCLUSION Inotuzumab ozogamicin has demonstrated efficacy against CD22(+) B-cell NHL, with reversible thrombocytopenia as the main toxicity.

Haben selektive COX-2-Hemmer unerwünschte renale und kardiovaskuläre Wirkungen [Do selective COX-2 inhibitors have adverse renal and cardiovascular effects?].

Selective cyclooxygenase-2-inhibitors (COX-2) were developed as an alternative to the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) in order to reduce their known gastrointestinal and renal toxicity. Several recent studies have shown the complex mechanism of the cyclooxygenase-2. The inhibition of the COX-2 has effects on renal hemodynamics, renal salt and water retention and may increase the thromboembolic and therefore the cardiovascular risk. The renal toxicity of the COX-2 inhibitors is similar to that of traditional NSAID. Regarding these data, COX-2 inhibitors should be prescribed with much caution to high risk patients, that is, patients with renal failure and/or cardiovascular diseases.

A comparison of dequalinium chloride vaginal tablets (Fluomizin®) and clindamycin vaginal cream in the treatment of bacterial vaginosis: a single-blind, randomized clinical trial of efficacy and safety.

AIMS: To investigate if vaginal application of dequalinium chloride (DQC, Fluomizin®) is as effective as vaginal clindamycin (CLM) in the treatment of bacterial vaginosis (BV). METHODS: This was a multinational, multicenter, single-blind, randomized trial in 15 centers, including 321 women. They were randomized to either vaginal DQC tablets or vaginal CLM cream. Follow-up visits were 1 week and 1 month after treatment. Clinical cure based on Amsel's criteria was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were rate of treatment failures and recurrences, incidence of post-treatment vulvovaginal candidosis (VVC), lactobacillary grade (LBG), total symptom score (TSC), and safety. RESULTS: Cure rates with DQC (C1: 81.5%, C2: 79.5%) were as high as with CLM (C1: 78.4%, C2: 77.6%). Thus, the treatment with DQC had equal efficacy as CLM cream. A trend to less common post-treatment VVC in the DQC-treated women was observed (DQC: 2.5%, CLM: 7.7%; p = 0.06). Both treatments were well tolerated with no serious adverse events occurring. CONCLUSION: Vaginal DQC has been shown to be equally effective as CLM cream, to be well tolerated with no systemic safety concerns, and is therefore a valid alternative therapy for women with BV [ClinicalTrials.gov, Med380104, NCT01125410].

Determinants of persistence in hypertensive patients treated with irbesartan: results of a postmarketing survey.

BACKGROUND: Persistence is a key factor for long-term blood pressure control, which is of high prognostic importance for patients at increased cardiovascular risk. Here we present the results of a post-marketing survey including 4769 hypertensive patients treated with irbesartan in 886 general practices in Switzerland. The goal of this survey was to evaluate the tolerance and the blood pressure lowering effect of irbesartan as well as the factors affecting persistence in a large unselected population. METHODS: Prospective observational survey conducted in general practices in all regions of Switzerland. Previously untreated and uncontrolled pre-treated patients were started with a daily dose of 150 mg irbesartan and followed up to 6 months. RESULTS: After an observation time slightly exceeding 4 months, the average reduction in systolic and diastolic blood pressure was 20 (95% confidence interval (CI) -19.6 to -20.7 mmHg) and 12 mmHg (95% CI -11.4 to -12.1 mmHg), respectively. At this time, 26% of patients had a blood pressure < 140/90 mmHg and 60% had a diastolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg. The drug was well tolerated with an incidence of adverse events (dizziness, headaches,...) of 8.0%. In this survey more than 80% of patients were still on irbesartan at 4 month. The most important factors predictive of persistence were the tolerability profile and the ability to achieve a blood pressure target < or = 140/90 mmHg before visit 2. Patients who switched from a fixed combination treatment tended to discontinue irbesartan more often whereas those who abandoned the previous treatment because of cough (a class side effect of ACE-Inhibitors) were more persistent with irbesartan. CONCLUSION: The results of this survey confirm that irbesartan is effective, well tolerated and well accepted by patients, as indicated by the good persistence. This post-marketing survey also emphasizes the importance of the tolerability profile and of achieving an early control of blood pressure as positive predictors of persistence.

Immunosuppresseurs: usages systémiques et neurologiques [Systemic and neurological uses of immunosuppressive agents].

Involvement of the central or peripheral nervous system, frequently present in systemic inflammatory immune disorders, has to be considered a severe threat and requires aggressive immunosuppressive treatment to achieve rapid remission. This is usually obtained with high-dose systemic corticosteroids combined with cyclophosphamide. Once remission is obtained, immunosuppressive agents with a more favorable safety profile are needed to exert a corticosteroid-sparing effect and minimize adverse events. New therapeutic approaches are currently developed to treat autoimmune diseases, mostly linked to the definition of new indications for biological agents such as TNF-alpha antagonists and rituximab.

EV02: a Phase I trial to compare the safety and immunogenicity of HIV DNA-C prime-NYVAC-C boost to NYVAC-C alone.

The aim of this randomised controlled trial was to see if the addition of 4 mg/ml DNA-C priming given by the intramuscular route at weeks 0 and 4 to NYVAC-C at weeks 20 and 24, safely increased the proportion of participants with HIV-specific T-cell responses measured by the interferon (IFN)-gamma ELISpot assay at weeks 26 and/or 28 compared to NYVAC-C alone. Although 2 individuals discontinued after the first DNA-C due to adverse events (1 vaso-vagal; 1 transient, asymptomatic elevation in alanine transaminase), the vaccines were well tolerated. Three others failed to complete the regimen (1 changed her mind; 2 lost to follow-up). Of the 35 that completed the regimen 90% (18/20) in the DNA-C group had ELISpot responses compared to 33% (5/15) that received NYVAC-C alone (p=0.001). Responses were to envelope in the majority (21/23). Of the 9 individuals with responses to envelope and other peptides, 8 were in the DNA-C group. These promising results suggest that DNA-C was an effective priming agent, that merits further investigation.

Appropriateness of early management of newly diagnosed Crohn's disease in a European population-based cohort.

OBJECTIVE: The European Panel on the Appropriateness of Crohn's disease Therapy (EPACT) has developed appropriateness criteria. We have applied these criteria retrospectively to the population-based inception cohort of Crohn's disease (CD) patients of the European Collaborative Study Group on Inflammatory Bowel Disease (EC-IBD). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 426 diagnosed CD patients from 13 European centers were enrolled at the time of diagnosis (first flare, naive patients). We used the EPACT definitions to identify 247 patients with active luminal CD. We then assessed the appropriateness of the initial drug prescription according to the EPACT criteria. RESULTS: Among the cohort patients 163 suffered from mild-to-moderate CD and 84 from severe CD. Among the mild-to-moderate disease group, 96 patients (59%) received an appropriate treatment, whereas for 66 patients (40%) the treatment was uncertain and in one case (1%) inappropriate. Among the severe disease group, 86% were treated medically and 14% required surgery. 59 (70%) were appropriately treated, whereas for one patient (1%) the procedure was considered uncertain and for 24 patients (29%) inappropriate. CONCLUSION: Initial treatment was appropriate in the majority of cases for non-complicated luminal CD. Inappropriate or uncertain treatment was given in a significant minority of patients, with an increased potential risk of adverse events.

Rapid Improvement in Health-Related Quality of Life in Gouty Arthritis Patients Treated with Canakinumab (ACZ885) Compared to Triamcinolone Acetonide

Background: Gout patients initiating urate lowering therapy have an increased risk of flares. Inflammation in gouty arthritis is induced by interleukin (IL)-1b. Canakinumab inhibits IL-1b effectively in clinical studies. This study compared different doses of canakinumab vs colchicine in preventing flares in gout patients initiating allopurinol therapy.Methods: In this 24 wk double blind study, gout patients (20-79 years) initiating allopurinol were randomized (1:1:1:1:1:1:2) to canakinumab s.c. single doses of 25, 50, 100, 200, 300 mg, or 150mg divided in doses every 4 wks (50þ50þ25þ25mg [q4wk]) or colchicine 0.5mg p.o. daily for 16 wks. Primary outcome was to determine the canakinumab dose giving comparable efficacy to colchicine with respect to number of flares occurring during first 16 wks. Secondary outcomes included number of patients with flares and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels during the first 16 wks.Results: 432 patients were randomized and 391 (91%) completed the study. All canakinumab doses were better than colchicine in preventing flares and therefore, a canakinumab dose comparable to colchicine couldn't be determined. Based on a negative binomialmodel, all canakinumab groups, except 25 mg, reduced the flare rate ratio per patient significantly compared to colchicine group (rate ratio estimates 25mg 0.60, 50mg 0.34, 100mg 0.28, 200mg 0.37, 300mg 0.29, q4wk 0.38; p_0.05). Percentage of patients with flares was lower for all canakinumab groups (25mg 27.3%, 50mg 16.7%, 100mg 14.8%, 200mg 18.5%, 300mg 15.1%, q4wk 16.7%) compared to colchicine group (44.4%). All patients taking canakinumab were significantly less likely to experience at least one gout flare than patients taking colchicine (odds ratio range [0.22 - 0.47]; p_0.05 for all). Median baseline CRP levels were 2.86 mg/L for 25 mg, 3.42 mg/L for 50 mg, 1.76 mg/L for 100 mg, 3.66 mg/L for 200 mg, 3.21 mg/L for 300 mg, 3.23 mg/L for q4wk canakinumab groups and 2.69 mg/L for colchicine group. In all canakinumab groups with median CRP levels above the normal range at baseline, median levels declined within 15 days of treatment and were maintained at normal levels (ULN¼3 mg/L) throughout the 16 wk period. Adverse events (AEs) occurred in 52.7% (25 mg), 55.6% (50 mg), 51.9% (100 mg), 51.9% (200 mg), 54.7% (300 mg), 58.5% (q4wk) of patients on canakinumab vs 53.7% of patients on colchicine. Serious AEs (SAE) were reported in 2 (3.6%; 25 mg), 2 (3.7%, 50 mg), 3 (5.6%, 100 mg), 3 (5.6%, 200 mg), 3 (5.7%, 300 mg), 1 (1.9%, q4wk) patients on canakinumab and in 5 (4.6%) patients on colchicine. 1 fatal SAE (myocardial infarction, not related to study drug) occurred in colchicine group.Conclusions: In this randomized, double-blind active controlled study of flare prevention in gout patients initiating allopurinol therapy, treatment with canakinumab led to a statistically significant reduction in flares compared with colchicine and was well tolerated.Disclosure statement: U.A., A.B., G.K., D.R. and P.S. are employees of and have stock options or bold holdings with Novartis Pharma AG. E.M. is a principal investigator for Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. E.N. has received consulting fees from Roche. N.S. has received research grants from Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. A.S. has received consultancy fees from Novartis Pharma AG, Abbott, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Essex, Pfizer, MSD, Roche, UCB and Wyeth. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Intravenous lacosamide for treatment of status epilepticus.

Objectives -  Treatment of established status epilepticus (SE) requires immediate intravenous anticonvulsant therapy. Currently used first-line drugs may cause potentially hazardous side effects. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous lacosamide (LCM) in SE after failure of standard treatment. Methods -  We retrospectively analyzed 39 patients (21 women, 18 men, median age 62 years) from the hospital databases of five neurological departments in Germany, Austria and Switzerland between September 2008 and January 2010 who were admitted in SE and received at least one dose of intravenous LCM. Results -  Types of SE were generalized convulsive (n = 6), complex partial (n = 17) and simple partial (n = 16). LCM was administered after failure of benzodiazepins or other standard drugs in all but one case. Median bolus dose of LCM was 400 mg (range 200-400 mg), which was administered at 40-80 mg/min in those patients where infusion rate was documented. SE stopped after LCM in 17 patients, while 22 patients needed further anticonvulsant treatment. The success rate in patients receiving LCM as first or second drug was 3/5, as third drug 11/19, and as fourth or later drug 3/15. In five subjects, SE could not be terminated at all. No serious adverse events attributed to LCM were documented. Conclusions -  Intravenous LCM may be an alternative treatment for established SE after failure of standard therapy, or when standard agents are considered unsuitable.

Prevalence of comedications and effect of potential drug-drug interactions in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Potential drug-drug interactions (PDDIs) might expand with new combination antiretroviral therapies (ART) and polypharmacy related to increasing age and comorbidities. We investigated the prevalence of comedications and PDDIs within a large HIV cohort, and their effect on ART efficacy and tolerability. METHODS: All medications were prospectively recorded in 1,497 ART-treated patients and screened for PDDIs using a customized version of the Liverpool drug interactions database. RESULTS: Overall, 68% (1,013/1,497) of patients had a comedication and 40% (599/1,497) had > or = 1 PDDI. Among patients with comedication, 2% (21/1,013) had red-flag interactions (contraindicated) and 59% (597/1,013) had orange-flag interactions (potential dose adjustment and/or close monitoring required). The latter involved mainly central nervous system drugs (49%), cardiovascular drugs (34%) and methadone (19%). In the multivariate analysis, factors associated with having a comedication were advanced age, female gender, obesity and HCV infection. Independent risk factors for PDDIs were regimens combining protease inhibitors and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (odds ratio [OR] 3.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.44-6.48), > or = 2 comedications (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.32-2.70), current illicit drug use (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.29-3.10) and patients with HCV infection (OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.19-2.56). Viral response was similar in patients with and without PDDIs (84.5% versus 86.4%; P=0.386). During follow-up, ART was modified in 134 patients with comedication regardless of the presence of PDDIs (P=0.524). CONCLUSIONS: PDDIs increase with complex ART and comorbidities. No adverse effect was noted on ART efficacy or tolerability; however, most PDDIs affected comedication but were manageable through dose adjustment or monitoring.