Search

Certolizumab pegol (Cimzia® ) is a recombinant, polyethylene glycolylated, antigen-binding fragment of a humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively targets and neutralizes tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α. The drug is indicated for subcutaneous use every 2 or 4 weeks (q2w or q4w) for the treatment of adults with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The efficacy of subcutaneous certolizumab pegol in adults with active RA has been investigated in several well designed, placebo-controlled trials. In four pivotal studies of ≤52 weeks duration, patients with moderate to severe disease receiving recommended dosages of certolizumab pegol (200 mg q2w or 400 mg q4w), either as monotherapy (after failing prior disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug [DMARD] therapy) or in combination with methotrexate (after responding inadequately to methotrexate alone), experienced rapid clinical improvement, with some combination trials also demonstrating inhibition of radiographic progression. The beneficial effects of certolizumab pegol therapy were generally maintained for up to ≈5 years in clinical trial extensions in which the drug was administered at dosages of 400 mg q4w or q2w. Additional studies suggest certolizumab pegol is also effective in patients who are Asian or have low to moderate disease activity, as well as more clinically representative patient populations. The tolerability profile of certolizumab pegol was acceptable, with infections/infestations the most common adverse events. Thus, certolizumab pegol is an effective option for the management of active RA in adults, although additional long-term and comparative efficacy and tolerability data are needed to help definitively position certolizumab pegol relative to other biological DMARDs, particularly other anti-TNF agents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A subcutaneous formulation of bortezomib is now indicated in the EU and the US for the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma. This article reviews pharmacological, therapeutic efficacy and tolerability data relevant to the utilization of subcutaneous bortezomib (Velcade® ) in the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma. In a randomized, nonblind, phase III study, subcutaneous bortezomib was noninferior to intravenous bortezomib in the treatment of adults with relapsed multiple myeloma, as determined by the overall response rate after four cycles of therapy (primary endpoint). No significant differences between the subcutaneous and intravenous bortezomib formulations were observed in the median time to first response, median progression-free survival, median time to progression and 1-year overall survival. Compared with intravenous bortezomib, subcutaneous bortezomib confers a significant advantage with respect to the incidence of peripheral neuropathy (all grades, grade ≥2 and grade ≥3). As a consequence, it provides a new treatment option for patients with multiple myeloma, particularly those with pre-existing neuropathy or at a high risk of developing peripheral neuropathy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Extended-release ranolazine (ranolazine ER) [Ranexa® ] is an antianginal agent that achieves its effects via a novel mechanism of action (inhibition of the late phase of the inward sodium current), without affecting heart rate or blood pressure (BP). This article reviews the efficacy, safety and tolerability of ranolazine ER as add-on therapy in patients with chronic stable angina pectoris, as well as summarizing its pharmacological properties and its use in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes. In the CARISA and ERICA trials, add-on therapy with ranolazine ER improved exercise tolerance and/or reduced angina frequency and nitroglycerin use in patients with chronic stable angina; benefits were seen across a variety of patient subgroups. Although results of the MERLIN-TIMI 36 trial do not support the use of ranolazine ER in the acute management of non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes, they do support its use as an antianginal therapy. Ranolazine ER was generally well tolerated, with the most commonly reported adverse events including dizziness, nausea, asthenia and constipation. Despite being associated with modest increases in the corrected QT interval, ranolazine ER demonstrated antiarrhythmic effects in the MERLIN-TIMI 36 trial. In conclusion, ranolazine ER provides an important option for use as add-on therapy to reduce symptoms in patients with chronic stable angina. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rabeprazole (Aciphex®, Alfence®, Pariet®) is a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) used for the treatment of adults with conditions requiring a reduction of gastric acid secretion such as erosive or ulcerative gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD), non-erosive reflux disease (NERD), duodenal and gastric ulcers, and pathological hypersecretory conditions including Zollinger-Ellison syndrome (ZES). It is also used as part of combination therapy for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori, a pathogen frequently implicated in the development of gastric and duodenal ulcers. Rabeprazole has a well established efficacy and safety profile in the treatment of gastric acid-related diseases. Rabeprazole is a useful, well tolerated and cost-effective option for the treatment of GORD, NERD, peptic ulcer and other gastric acid-related diseases (including ZES), and provides an appropriate alternative to other currently available PPIs, with the added benefits of having a consistent efficacy profile and low drug interaction potential due to its predominantly nonenzymatic metabolism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Entecavir (Baraclude®), a nucleoside analogue, is rapidly phosphorylated to the active intracellular 5'-triphosphate form that inhibits replication of hepatitis B virus (HBV). Oral entecavir is approved in the US, EU and several countries worldwide for the treatment of chronic HBV infection in adults (≥16 years of age) with evidence of active viral replication and persistently elevated serum ALT and/or AST levels, and/or histological evidence of active disease. In several randomized, double-blind, multicentre trials, oral entecavir was an effective and generally well tolerated treatment in nucleoside-naive and lamivudine-refractory adult patients with chronic HBV infection, irrespective of whether patients were hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive or -negative. Furthermore, it was more efficacious, associated with a lower risk of resistance, and more cost effective than lamivudine in these patient populations, with both drugs having a similar tolerability profile. In the EARLY trial, entecavir was significantly more effective than and as well tolerated as adefovir dipivoxil therapy in nucleoside-naive patients. In addition, in a double-blind, multicentre trial, entecavir plus lamivudine-based highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) was more effective than placebo plus lamivudine-based HAART in patients coinfected with HBV and HIV. Although the exact position of entecavir relative to other agents, such as tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and adefovir dipivoxil, for the treatment of chronic HBV infection remains to be fully determined, an important aspect in this positioning is the emergence of drug resistance. Hence, entecavir therapy provides a valuable first-line option in nucleoside-naive patients with chronic HBV infection and is a useful alternative in lamivudine-refractory patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Raltegravir (Isentress®), an integrase inhibitor, inhibits the insertion of HIV-1 complementary DNA into the host genome. It is indicated in combination with other antiretroviral therapy (ART) agents for the treatment of HIV-1 infection in treatment-experienced adult patients who have evidence of viral replication and HIV-1 strains resistant to multiple ART agents. It is the first of a new class of ART agents to be approved that, as a result of a different mechanism of action to other ART agents, has good activity against multidrug-resistant HIV-1 strains. In clinical trials in treatment-experienced patients with HIV-1 infection and evidence of viral replication, the addition of oral raltegravir to an optimized background therapy (OBT) regimen improved virological and immunological responses at 16 and 48 weeks to a greater extent than placebo plus OBT. Raltegravir therapy was generally well tolerated, with a similar incidence of mild to moderate adverse events in the treatment and placebo arms. The introduction of integrase inhibitors extends the options available for managing treatment-experienced patients with multiple-drug-resistant HIV-1 infection. Results to date suggest that the combination of raltegravir and OBT will be a valuable treatment option for this difficult-to-treat patient group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Oral omega-3 ethylester concentrate (omega-3 EEC) [Omacor®; Lovaza™] is indicated as an adjuvant therapy in adult patients for secondary prevention postmyocardial infarction (MI) and the treatment of hypertriglyceridaemia in the majority of European countries, and for the treatment of hypertriglyceridaemia (serum triglyceride levels ≥5.6 mmol/L [≥500mg/dL]) in the US. Each 1000 mg capsule of omega-3 EEC consists of 460 mg of ethyl eicosapentaenoic acid and 380 mg of ethyl docosahexaenoic acid. The addition of omega-3 EEC 1000 mg/day to standard medical therapy in the GISSI-Prevenzione study provided secondary prevention benefits in post-MI adult patients. The benefits were attributable to reductions in death and cardiovascular death (including sudden death). Additional data examining the extent and mechanisms of the cardiovascular benefit conferred by omega-3 EEC in secondary prevention would be useful. As an adjunct to diet, monotherapy with omega-3 EEC 4000 mg/day significantly reduced triglyceride levels in patients with hypertriglyceridaemia, although limited data suggest it was less effective than gemfibrozil. In addition, omega-3 EEC 4000 mg/day plus simvastatin or atorvastatin reduced triglyceride, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) and/or very-low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (VLDL-C) levels to a significantly greater extent than placebo plus simvastatin or atorvastatin. Omega-3 EEC was generally well tolerated both as secondary prevention post-MI and in the treatment of hypertriglyceridaemia. Thus, omega-3 EEC is a useful option both in secondary prevention post-MI and the treatment of hypertriglyceridaemia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Atazanavir (Reyataz®), a protease inhibitor (PI), is approved in many countries for use as a component of antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens for the treatment of adult, and in some countries in paediatric, patients with HIV-1 infection. ART regimens containing ritonavir-boosted atazanavir improved virological and immunological markers in adult patients with HIV-1 infection, and had similar efficacy to regimens containing lopinavir/ritonavir in treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients. In addition, unboosted atazanavir was noninferior to ritonavir-boosted atazanavir in treatment-naive patients. Atazanavir is administered once daily and has a low capsule burden. Atazanavir, whether unboosted or boosted, was generally well tolerated and appeared to be associated with less marked metabolic effects, including less alteration of lipid levels, than other PIs. These properties mean that boosted atazanavir, and unboosted atazanavir in patients unable to tolerate ritonavir, continues to have a role as a component of ART regimens in patients with HIV-1 infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Insulin glulisine (Apidra®) is a human insulin analogue approved for the improvement of glycaemic control in adults, adolescents and children with diabetes mellitus. It has similar binding properties, and is associated with a faster onset but similar level of glucose disposal, to regular human insulin (RHI). Insulin glulisine and insulin lispro have similar effects on glucose levels. Insulin glulisine is effective when compared to other short- and rapid-acting insulins, demonstrating either noninferiority, no significant difference, or superiority in primary endpoints in studies involving patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. It is more effective and has a faster onset and shorter duration of activity than RHI. Insulin glulisine is as effective as insulin lispro in patients with type 1 diabetes; however, there is a need for further, well designed head-to-head comparisons with insulin lispro in patients with type 2 diabetes and with insulin aspart in patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes to fully establish the place of insulin glulisine in the management of diabetes. Insulin glulisine has a flexible administration period, as it can be administered immediately before or after meals. Hypoglycaemia, a common risk with insulins, occurs at a similar rate among recipients of insulin glulisine to that seen with other insulins. Thus, insulin glulisine is an effective and well tolerated option for the treatment of patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome®) is a lipid-associated formulation of the broad-spectrum polyene antifungal agent amphotericin B. It is active against clinically relevant yeasts and moulds, including Candida spp., Aspergillus spp. and filamentous moulds such as Zygomycetes, and is approved for the treatment of invasive fungal infections in many countries worldwide. It was developed to improve the tolerability profile of amphotericin B deoxycholate, which was for many decades considered the gold standard of antifungal treatment, despite being associated with infusion-related events and nephrotoxicity. In well controlled trials, liposomal amphotericin B had similar efficacy to amphotericin B deoxycholate and amphotericin B lipid complex as empirical therapy in adult and paediatric patients with febrile neutropenia. In addition, caspofungin was noninferior to liposomal amphotericin B as empirical therapy in adult patients with febrile neutropenia. For the treatment of confirmed invasive fungal infections, liposomal amphotericin B was more effective than amphotericin B deoxycholate treatment in patients with disseminated histoplasmosis and AIDS, and was noninferior to amphotericin B deoxycholate in patients with acute cryptococcal meningitis and AIDS. In adults, micafungin was shown to be noninferior to liposomal amphotericin B for the treatment of candidaemia and invasive candidiasis. Data from animal studies suggested that higher dosages of liposomal amphotericin B might improve efficacy; however, in the AmBiLoad trial in patients with invasive mould infection, there was no statistical difference in efficacy between the standard dosage of liposomal amphotericin B 3mg/kg/day and a higher 10mg/kg/day dosage, although the standard dosage was better tolerated. Despite being associated with fewer infusion-related adverse events and less nephrotoxicity than amphotericin B deoxycholate and amphotericin B lipid complex, liposomal amphotericin B use is still limited to some extent by these adverse events. Both echinocandins were better tolerated than liposomal amphotericin B. The cost of liposomal amphotericin B therapy may also restrict its use, but further pharmacoeconomic studies are required to fully define its cost effectiveness compared with other antifungal agents. Based on comparative data from well controlled trials, extensive clinical experience and its broad spectrum of activity, liposomal amphotericin B remains a first-line option for empirical therapy in patients with febrile neutropenia and in those with disseminated histoplasmosis, and is an option for the treatment of AIDS-associated cryptococcal meningitis, and for invasive Candida spp. or Aspergillus spp. infections. Pharmacological Properties Amphotericin B, a macrocyclic, polyene antifungal agent, is thought to act by binding to ergosterol, the principal sterol in fungal cell membranes and Leishmania cells. This results in a change in membrane permeability, causing metabolic disturbance, leakage of small molecules and, as a consequence, cell death. In vitro and in vivo studies have shown that liposomal amphotericin B remains closely associated with the liposomes in the circulation, thereby reducing the potential for nephrotoxicity and infusion-related toxicity associated with conventional amphotericin B. Amphotericin B shows very good in vitro activity against a broad spectrum of clinically relevant fungal isolates, including most strains of Candida spp. and Aspergillus spp., and other filamentous fungi such as Zygomycetes. Liposomal amphotericin B has proven effective in various animal models of fungal infections, including those for candidiasis, aspergillosis, fusariosis and zygomycosis. Liposomal amphotericin B also shows immunomodulatory effects, although the mechanisms involved are not fully understood, and differ from those of amphotericin B deoxycholate and amphotericin B colloidal dispersion.… [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sertaconazole (Dermofix®, Ertaczo™, Ginedermofix®, Monazol, Mykosert® or Zalain®), an imidazole antifungal agent, inhibits the synthesis of ergosterol, an essential cell wall component of fungi. It is indicated in the EU for the treatment of superficial skin mycoses such as dermatophytosis (including tinea corporis, tinea cruris, tinea manus, tinea barbae and tinea pedis), cutaneous candidiasis, pityriasis versicolor and seborrhoeic dermatitis of the scalp, and in the US for tinea pedis only. Sertaconazole has broad-spectrum antifungal activity against dermatophytes of the Trichophyton, Epidermophyton and Microsporum genera, and yeasts of the genera Candida and Cryptococcus; additionally, it is effective against opportunistic filamentous fungi and Gram-positive bacteria. Moreover, the antifungal activity of sertaconazole is maintained in clinical isolates of dermatophytes that show reduced susceptibility to other azoles. While the drug has good dermal penetration, this is not associated with systemic absorption. In clinical trials in patients with superficial mycoses, 2% sertaconazole cream applied twice daily was effective in the eradication of a range of dermatophytoses, and a significantly greater proportion of patients were cured compared with those receiving 2% miconazole cream twice-daily treatment. In patients with vulvovaginal candidiasis, sertaconazole as a single-dose ovule or tablet was effective in the eradication of Candida spp., and achieved both a more rapid and a higher cure rate compared with a triple dose of econazole. Both as a topical cream and suppository preparation, sertaconazole was generally well tolerated. Sertaconazole is a well established antifungal agent, which is now available in a variety of formulations, and remains a useful treatment option particularly in patients with fungal infections resistant to other azoles. Pharmacological Properties Like other azoles, sertaconazole inhibits the synthesis of ergosterol, an essential component of fungal cell walls, resulting in disruption of mycelial growth and replication. However, at higher concentrations, sertaconazole binds directly to nonsterol lipids in the fungal cell wall, which leads to increased permeability and subsequent lysis of the mycelium. Thus, depending on the concentration, sertaconazole may exhibit both fungistatic and fungicidal activities. Sertaconazole shows good in vitro fungistatic activity against a broad range of dermatophytes of the Trichophyton, Epidermophyton and Microsporum genera, and yeasts of the genera Candida and Cryptococcus. The geometric minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of sertaconazole ranged from 0.06 to 1 μg/mL against a variety of dermatophyte isolates (n = 456), which included 114 isolates with reduced susceptibility to fluconazole (MICs ≥16 μg/mL). Similarly, against a variety of Candida spp., MIC values at which 90% of cultures were inhibited (MIC90) for sertaconazole were ≤0.1-4 μg/mL compared with MIC90 of 0.1 to >100 μg/mL for fluconazole. Furthermore, fungicidal activity of sertaconazole was apparent against a variety of Candida spp., with minimum fungicidal concentration values of 0.5-64 μg/mL. Additionally, sertaconazole showed antibacterial activity with a geometric MIC of 0.88 μg/mL against 21 isolates of Gram-positive bacteria. When applied topically in experimental models of inflammation, sertaconazole showed some evidence of anti-inflammatory action. Only 4% of 250 clinical isolates of dermatophytes and Scopulariopsis brevicaulis from Spanish hospitals showed resistance to sertaconazole, and continuous culture of Candida spp. in sertaconazole-containing media failed to induce resistance. Following application of sertaconazole as a topical cream or vaginal suppository, plasma levels of the drug remained undetectable in healthy volunteers.… [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sorafenib (Nexavar®) is an orally active multikinase inhibitor that is approved in the EU for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Monotherapy with sorafenib prolongs overall survival and delays the time to progression in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who are not candidates for potentially curative treatment or transarterial chemoembolization. Sorafenib is generally well tolerated in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Thus, sorafenib represents an important advance in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and is the new standard of care for this condition. Pharmacological Properties The bi-aryl urea sorafenib is an oral multikinase inhibitor that inhibits cell surface tyrosine kinase receptors (e.g. vascular endothelial growth factor receptors and platelet-derived growth factor receptor-β) and downstream intracellular serine/ threonine kinases (e.g. Raf-1, wild-type B-Raf and mutant B-Raf); these kinases are involved in tumour cell proliferation and tumour angiogenesis. In vitro, dose-dependent inhibition of cell proliferation and induction of apoptosis was seen with sorafenib in human hepatocellular carcinoma cells lines. Sorafenib demonstrated dose-dependent antitumour activity in a murine xenograft model of human hepatocellular carcinoma. Steady-state plasma concentrations were reached within 7 days in patients with advanced, refractory solid tumours who received twice-daily oral sorafenib. Metabolism of sorafenib occurs primarily in the liver and is mediated via cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 and uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase 1A9. In advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, differences in sorafenib pharmacokinetics between Child-Pugh A and B patients were not considered clinically significant. Sorafenib may be associated with drug interactions. For example, sorafenib exposure was reduced by an average 37% with concomitant administration of the CYP3A4 inducer rifampicin (rifampin); sorafenib concentrations may also be decreased by other CYP3A4 inducers. Therapeutic Efficacy Monotherapy with oral sorafenib 400mg twice daily prolonged median overall survival and delayed the median time to progression in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, according to the results of two randomized, doubleblind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, phase III trials (the SHARP trial and the Asia-Pacific trial). There was no significant difference between sorafenib and placebo recipients in the median time to symptomatic progression in either trial. The vast majority of patients included in these trials were Child-Pugh A. Combination therapy with sorafenib plus doxorubicin did not delay the median time to progression to a significant extent compared with doxorubicin alone in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, according to the results of a randomized, double-blind, phase II trial. However, the median durations of overall survival and progression-free survival were significantly longer in patients receiving sorafenib plus doxorubicin than in those receiving doxorubicin alone. Combination therapy with sorafenib plus tegafur/uracil or mitomycin also showed potential in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, according to the results of noncomparative trials. Tolerability Monotherapy with oral sorafenib was generally well tolerated in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, with a manageable adverse effect profile; diarrhoea and hand-foot skin reaction were consistently the most commonly occurring drug-related adverse events in clinical trials. In the SHARP trial, drugrelated adverse events of any grade occurring in significantly more sorafenib than placebo recipients included diarrhoea, hand-foot skin reaction, anorexia, alopecia, weight loss, dry skin, abdominal pain, voice changes and 'other' dermatological events. A similar tolerability profile was seen in the Asia-Pacific trial.… [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the therapeutic efficacy of valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide tablets in the treatment of patients with hypertension. In well designed trials of patients with hypertension, the superior antihypertensive efficacy of once-daily valsartan 80-320mg plus hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 or 25mg over the individual components has been demonstrated. Valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide is well tolerated and its side effects are generally mild and transient. The antihypertensive efficacy of valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide is generally similar to that of other angiotensin receptor blocker/hydrochlorothiazide combinations.

Telmisartan (Micardis®, Pritor®), a highly selective angiotensin II (AII) type 1 (AT1) receptor antagonist, is approved for the treatment of hypertension, either as monotherapy or in combination with other antihypertensive agents. The long elimination half-life of telmisartan ensures the drug provides effective reductions in blood pressure (BP) across the entire 24-hour dosage interval. Extensive evidence from well designed clinical trials and the clinical practice setting indicates that telmisartan, either as monotherapy or in combination with other antihypertensive agents, provides long-term antihypertensive efficacy and is well tolerated in a broad spectrum of hypertensive patients, including the elderly and those with coexisting type 2 diabetes mellitus, metabolic syndrome and/or renal impairment. Notably, BP control is sustained throughout the 24-hour dosage interval, including during the last 6 hours of this period. Independent of its effect on BP, telmisartan displays favourable effects on insulin resistance, lipid levels, left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) and renal function. The consistent antihypertensive efficacy during the entire 24-hour dosage interval and sustained BP-lowering effect in the long term, combined with its favourable tolerability profile, mean that telmisartan is a valuable first-line treatment option for the management of essential hypertension. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pioglitazone is an antihyperglycaemic agent that, in the presence of insulin resistance, increases hepatic and peripheral insulin sensitivity, thereby inhibiting hepatic gluconeogenesis and increasing peripheral and splanchnic glucose uptake. Pioglitazone is generally well tolerated, weight gain and oedema are the most common emergent adverse events, and there are no known drug interactions between pioglitazone and other drugs. In clinical trials in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, pioglitazone as monotherapy, or in combination with metformin, repaglinide, insulin or a sulphonylurea, induced both long- and short-term improvements in glycaemic control and serum lipid profiles. Pioglitazone was also effective in reducing some measures of cardiovascular risk and arteriosclerosis. Pioglitazone thus offers an effective treatment option for the management of patients with type 2 diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anagrelide (Agrylin®, Xagrid®) is an oral imidazoquinazoline agent which is indicated in Europe for the reduction of elevated platelet counts in at-risk patients with essential thrombocythaemia who are intolerant of or refractory to their current therapy, and in the US for the reduction of elevated platelet counts and the amelioration of thrombohaemorrhagic events in patients with thrombocythaemia associated with myeloproliferative disorders. Anagrelide is well established as an effective platelet-lowering agent in most patients with essential thrombocythaemia, including both treatment-naive patients and those refractory to other cytoreductive therapy. Results of the only randomised trial to date (the Primary Thrombocythaemia 1 [PT1] study) indicated that the composite primary endpoint (arterial or venous thrombosis, serious haemorrhage or death from vascular causes) occurred more often in recipients of anagrelide plus aspirin than in those receiving hydroxycarbamide (hydroxyurea) plus aspirin. This trial also indicated that the incidence of the secondary endpoints transient ischaemic attack and gastrointestinal bleeding favoured hydroxycarbamide plus aspirin, while the incidence of venous thrombosis favoured anagrelide plus aspirin. There were no differences between the groups in the incidence of secondary endpoints myocardial infarction, stroke, unstable angina, pulmonary embolism, hepatic-vein thrombosis, other serious haemorrhage or related deaths. The design of the PT1 study has been queried with respect to the heterogeneous nature of the study population (possible inclusion of patients with early myelofibrotic disease) and the concomitant use of aspirin (interaction with anagrelide causing increased bleeding events). Further data are therefore required before the role of anagrelide in essential thrombocythaemia can be finalised. In the meantime, when considering treatment options for patients with this disorder, anagrelide's positive effects on platelet function, lack of mutagenicity and lack of association with leukaemia or angiogenesis must be balanced against its comparative expense and positive inotropic effects. Thus, the role of anagrelide in the management of high-risk patients with essential thrombocythaemia will ultimately depend on individual patient assessment and future clarification of the potential leukaemogenicity of hydroxycarbamide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Emtricitabine (Emtriva®) is an orally administered nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) that is indicated in combination with other antiretroviral agents in the treatment of HIV infection in adults. As a component of antiretroviral therapy (ART), emtricitabine effectively reduces and/or maintains suppression of viral load in ART-naive adults or ART-experienced adults switching from stable combination regimens, and is generally well tolerated. Emtricitabine is a component of preferred initial HIV combination therapy regimens; it can be used in place of lamivudine as part of the dual NRTI backbone in non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)- and protease inhibitor (PI)-based regimens. Moreover, preliminary data from a randomised, open-label study suggest that emtricitabine plus tenofovir DF, a preferred dual-NRTI combination, is better tolerated than co-formulated lamivudine/zidovudine, another preferred dual-NRTI combination, resulting in a higher persistent virological response rate, as analysed using the US FDA time to loss of virological response (TLOVR) algorithm. With the convenience of once-daily (single pill) administration, no dietary restrictions and a favourable drug interaction and tolerability profile, emtricitabine should facilitate patient adherence to treatment, which, in turn, is central to the success of antiretroviral therapy. Similarly, emtricitabine is attractive as an option for ART-experienced stable adults requiring regimen simplification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dexrazoxane (Cardioxane®, Zinecard®), a cyclic derivative of edetic acid, is a site-specific cardioprotective agent that effectively protects against anthracycline-induced cardiac toxicity. Dexrazoxane is approved in the US and some European countries for cardioprotection in women with advanced and/or metastatic breast cancer receiving doxorubicin; in other countries dexrazoxane is approved for use in a wider range of patients with advanced cancer receiving anthracyclines. As shown in clinical trials, intravenous dexrazoxane significantly reduces the incidence of anthracycline-induced congestive heart failure (CHF) and adverse cardiac events in women with advanced breast cancer or adults with soft tissue sarcomas or small-cell lung cancer, regardless of whether the drug is given before the first dose of anthracycline or the administration is delayed until cumulative doxorubicin dose is ≥300 mg/m2. The drug also appears to offer cardioprotection irrespective of pre-existing cardiac risk factors. Importantly, the antitumour efficacy of anthracyclines is unlikely to be altered by dexrazoxane use, although the drug has not been shown to improve progression-free and overall patient survival. At present, the cardioprotective efficacy of dexrazoxane in patients with childhood malignancies is supported by limited data. The drug is generally well tolerated and has a tolerability profile similar to that of placebo in cancer patients undergoing anthracycline-based chemotherapy, with the exception of a higher incidence of severe leukopenia (78% vs 68%; p < 0.01). Dexrazoxane is the only cardioprotective agent with proven efficacy in cancer patients receiving anthracycline chemotherapy and is a valuable option for the prevention of cardiotoxicity in this patient population [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Enoxaparin (Clexane®, Lovenox®) is a low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) that has been widely used in the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in surgical patients. More recently, with the recognition of the high incidence of VTE in acutely ill medical (nonsurgical) patients, enoxaparin has been evaluated for thromboprophylaxis in this patient population. Subcutaneous enoxaparin 40mg once daily has shown efficacy in the short-term thromboprophylaxis of VTE in nonsurgical patients with severely restricted mobility due to acute illness in well controlled clinical trials. The drug is at least similar in efficacy to unfractionated heparin (UFH) and its pharmacological profile allows once-daily administration, in contrast to the twice- or three-times-daily administration required with UFH. The tolerability profile of enoxaparin is also similar to that of UFH, except that the incidences of local haematomas and increased liver enzymes are lower with enoxaparin. The optimal duration of prophylaxis in nonsurgical patients is currently being evaluated and the results of extended prophylaxis with enoxaparin evaluated in the EXCLAIM (EXtended CLinical prophylaxis in Acutely Ill Medical patients) trial are awaited with interest. Currently, short-term enoxaparin appears to provide a cost-effective treatment alternative to UFH for VTE prophylaxis in nonsurgical patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Combination therapy with subcutaneous peginterferon α-2a (40KD) [Pegasys®] plus oral ribavirin (Copegus®) has been evaluated previously in patients with chronic hepatitis C and elevated ALT levels. A recent randomised, nonblind, multicentre trial examined the efficacy of this combination therapy in the treatment of patients with persistently ‘normal' ALT levels. These trial results showed that combination therapy with peginterferon α-2a (40KD) plus ribavirin is effective in patients with chronic hepatitis C and persistently normal ALT levels. Overall, a sustained virological response occurred in over 50% of patients who received combination therapy for 48 weeks, albeit with a low daily dosage of ribavirin. The tolerability profile of combination therapy in patients with persistently normal ALT levels is similar to that seen in patients with elevated ALT levels. The decision as to whether or not treatment should be initiated in patients with chronic hepatitis C and persistently normal ALT levels should be made on an individual basis. If a decision is made to treat, combination therapy with peginterferon α-2a (40KD) plus ribavirin can be considered a first-line treatment option. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Candesartan cilexetil is the orally administered pro-drug of candesartan, a highly selective antagonist of the angiotensin II subtype 1 receptor that mediates the pressor activities of angiotensin II. Candesartan cilexetil is widely used for the treatment of hypertension and has recently been approved in Europe for the treatment of chronic heart failure (CHF) in patients with impaired left ventricular (LV) systolic function. Results of the CHARM (Candesartan in Heart failure: Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and morbidity) programme suggest that oral candesartan cilexetil reduces morbidity and mortality in patients with CHF and LV ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤40%. There are cardiovascular benefits when candesartan cilexetil is administered as an alternative to an ACE inhibitor, or as an add-on to current treatment regimens that include an ACE inhibitor, in symptomatic CHF. While tolerability is generally good, renal monitoring is required. The recent approval of candesartan cilexetil as both add-on and alternative therapy to ACE inhibitors in patients with CHF and impaired LV systolic function recognises the cardiovascular benefits of candesartan cilexetil in both types of treatment regimens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Paricalcitol (Zemplar®) is a synthetic vitamin D2 analogue that inhibits the secretion of parathyroid hormone (PTH) through binding to the vitamin D receptor. It is approved in the US and in most European nations for intravenous use in the prevention and treatment of secondary hyperparathyroidism associated with chronic renal failure in adult, and in the US paediatric, patients. Paricalcitol effectively reduced elevated serum PTH levels and was generally well tolerated in children and adults with secondary hyperparathyroidism associated with chronic renal failure. In well designed clinical trials, paricalcitol was as effective as calcitriol and as well tolerated in terms of the incidence of prolonged hypercalcaemia and/or elevated calcium-phosphorus product (Ca × P). Thus, paricalcitol is a useful option for the management of secondary hyperparathyroidism in adults and children with chronic renal failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Antihistamines are useful medications for the treatment of a variety of allergic disorders. Second-generation antihistamines avidly and selectively bind to peripheral histamine H1 receptors and, consequently, provide gratifying relief of histamine-mediated symptoms in a majority of atopic patients. This tight receptor specificity additionally leads to few effects on other neuronal or hormonal systems, with the result that adverse effects associated with these medications, with the exception of noticeable sedation in about 10% of cetirizine-treated patients, resemble those of placebo overall. Similarly, serious adverse drug reactions and interactions are uncommon with these medicines. Therapeutic interchange to one of the available second-generation antihistamines is a reasonable approach to limiting an institutional formulary, and adoption of such a policy has proven capable of creating substantial cost savings. Differences in overall efficacy and safety between available second-generation antihistamines, when administered in equivalent dosages, are not large. However, among the antihistamines presently available, fexofenadine may offer the best overall balance of effectiveness and safety, and this agent is an appropriate selection for initial or switch therapy for most patients with mild or moderate allergic symptoms. Cetirizine is the most potent antihistamine available and has been subjected to more clinical study than any other. This agent is appropriate for patients proven unresponsive to other antihistamines and for those with the most severe symptoms who might benefit from antihistamine treatment of the highest potency that can be dose-titrated up to maximal intensity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (tenofovir DF; Viread®), an ester prodrug of the nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) tenofovir, is indicated in combination with other antiretroviral agents in the treatment of HIV infection. As a component of an antiretroviral regimen, oral tenofovir DF 300mg once daily effectively reduces viral load in patients with HIV infection who are treatment-experienced with baseline NRTI resistance mutations or treatment-naive. Tenofovir DF provides a simple and convenient once-daily dosage regimen, and is generally well tolerated and able to produce sustained suppression of viral replication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Extending the period of anticoagulation is an active area of investigation in both primary and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolic disease. In orthopaedic surgery, particularly in patients undergoing hip surgery, there is a growing interest in using extended anticoagulation beyond that traditionally given in the postoperative period using low-molecular weight heparin, oral anticoagulants, or newer agents such as fondaparinux sodium. Most studies show a benefit to extending anticoagulation without a considerable increase in major bleeding. There have been several large clinical trials addressing the question of extending oral anticoagulation in secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Just how long anticoagulation should be given in the treatment of venous thromboembolic disease remains an open question, depending on the nature of the initial VTE, associated patient risk factors and the risks of major bleeding. Future directions include the use of newer agents for anticoagulation as well as methods of better defining who will benefit most from extended anticoagulation based on an identification of risk factors with the aid of markers such as D-dimer or residual vein thrombosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Platelet glycoprotein (Gp) IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists improve outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes without persistent ST-segment elevation, but relative effects depend on appropriate patient selection. Recent data from the CRUSADE (Can Rapid Risk Stratification of Unstable Angina Patients Suppress ADverse Outcomes with Early Implementation of the ACC/AHA Guidelines) quality improvement initiative suggests that GpIIb/IIIa antagonists are underused in clinical practice. The relationship between GpIIb/IIIa inhibition and the magnitude of clinical benefit in the setting of acute coronary syndromes is complex. Several key factors should be considered for proper patient selection, including accurate patient risk stratification, incorporation of these agents with an early invasive management strategy and the concomitant use of other anti-thrombotic therapies. Current practice guidelines for the treatment of patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes support the integration of an early invasive management with optimal pharmacological therapy, including GpIIb/IIIa antagonists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Insulin is one of the oldest and best studied treatments for diabetes mellitus. Despite many improvements in the management of diabetes, the nonphysiological time-action profiles of conventional insulins remain a significant obstacle. However, the advent of recombinant DNA technology made it possible to overcome these limitations in the time-action profiles of conventional insulins. Used as prandial (e.g. insulin lispro or insulin aspart) and basal (e.g. insulin glargine) insulin, the analogues simulate physiological insulin profiles more closely than the older conventional insulins. If rapid-acting insulin analogues are used in the hospital, healthcare providers will need a new mind-set. Any error in coordination between timing of rapid-acting insulin administration and meal ingestion may result in hypoglycaemia. However, guidelines regarding in-hospital use of insulin analogues are few. The safety profile of insulin analogues is still not completely established in long-term clinical studies. Several studies have shown conflicting results with respect to the tumourigenic potential of this new class of agents. The clinical implications of these findings are not clear. Although novel insulin analogues are promising ‘designer drugs’ in our armamentarium to overcome some of the limitations of conventional insulin therapy, cost may be a limiting factor for some patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a progressive and complex disorder that is difficult to treat effectively in the long term. The majority of patients are overweight or obese at diagnosis and will be unable to achieve or sustain near normoglycaemia without oral antidiabetic agents; a sizeable proportion of patients will eventually require insulin therapy to maintain long-term glycaemic control, either as monotherapy or in conjunction with oral antidiabetic therapy. The frequent need for escalating therapy is held to reflect progressive loss of islet β-cell function, usually in the presence of obesity-related insulin resistance. Today’s clinicians are presented with an extensive range of oral antidiabetic drugs for type 2 diabetes. The main classes are heterogeneous in their modes of action, safety profiles and tolerability. These main classes include agents that stimulate insulin secretion (sulphonylureas and rapid-acting secretagogues), reduce hepatic glucose production (biguanides), delay digestion and absorption of intestinal carbohydrate (α-glucosidase inhibitors) or improve insulin action (thiazolidinediones). The UKPDS (United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study) demonstrated the benefits of intensified glycaemic control on microvascular complications in newly diagnosed patients with type 2 diabetes. However, the picture was less clearcut with regard to macrovascular disease, with neither sulphonylureas nor insulin significantly reducing cardiovascular events. The impact of oral antidiabetic agents on atherosclerosis – beyond expected effects on glycaemic control – is an increasingly important consideration. In the UKPDS, overweight and obese patients randomised to initial monotherapy with metformin experienced significant reductions in myocardial infarction and diabetes-related deaths. Metformin does not promote weight gain and has beneficial effects on several cardiovascular risk factors. Accordingly, metformin is widely regarded as the drug of choice for most patients with type 2 diabetes. Concern about cardiovascular safety of sulphonylureas has largely dissipated with generally reassuring results from clinical trials, including the UKPDS. Encouragingly, the recent Steno-2 Study showed that intensive target-driven, multifactorial approach to management, based around a sulphonylurea, reduced the risk of both micro- and macrovascular complications in high-risk patients. Theoretical advantages of selectively targeting postprandial hyperglycaemia require confirmation in clinical trials of drugs with preferential effects on this facet of hyperglycaemia are currently in progress. The insulin-sensitising thiazolidinedione class of antidiabetic agents has potentially advantageous effects on multiple components of the metabolic syndrome; the results of clinical trials with cardiovascular endpoints are awaited. The selection of initial monotherapy is based on a clinical and biochemical assessment of the patient, safety considerations being paramount. In some circumstances, for example pregnancy or severe hepatic or renal impairment, insulin may be the treatment of choice when nonpharmacological measures prove inadequate. Insulin is also required for metabolic decompensation, that is, incipient or actual diabetic ketoacidosis, or non-ketotic hyperosmolar hyperglycaemia. Certain comorbidities, for example presentation with myocardial infarction during other acute intercurrent illness, may make insulin the best option. Oral antidiabetic agents should be initiated at a low dose and titrated up according to glycaemic response, as judged by measurement of glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentration, supplemented in some patients by self monitoring of capillary blood glucose. The average glucose-lowering effect of the major classes of oral antidiabetic agents is broadly similar (averaging a 1–2% reduction in HbA1c), α-glucosidase inhibitors being rather less effective. Tailoring the treatment to the individual patient is an important principle. Doses are gradually titrated up according to response. However, the maximal glucose-lowering action for sulphonylureas is usually attained at appreciably lower doses (approximately 50%) than the manufacturers’ recommended daily maximum. Combinations of certain agents, for example a secretagogue plus a biguanide or a thiazolidinedione, are logical and widely used, and combination preparations are now available in some countries. While the benefits of metformin added to a sulphonylurea were initially less favourable in the UKPDS, longer-term data have allayed concern. When considering long-term therapy, issues such as tolerability and convenience are important additional considerations. Neither sulphonylureas nor biguanides are able to appreciably alter the rate of progression of hyperglycaemia in patients with type 2 diabetes. Preliminary data suggesting that thiazolidinediones may provide better long-term glycaemic stability are currently being tested in clinical trials; current evidence, while encouraging, is not conclusive. Delayed progression from glucose intolerance to type 2 diabetes in high-risk individuals with glucose intolerance has been demonstrated with troglitazone, metformin and acarbose. However, intensive lifestyle intervention can be more effective than drug therapy, at least in the setting of interventional clinical trials. No antidiabetic drugs are presently licensed for use in prediabetic individuals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Worsening glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus relates to a decline in β-cell function, associated with impaired negative feedback regulation of insulin release. Insulin resistance, the ‘traditional’ cornerstone defect of type 2 diabetes, leads to an array of adverse effects on β cells, including hypertrophy, apoptosis and those caused by lipotoxicity and glucotoxicity. In particular, increased levels of free fatty acids and their metabolites are thought to diminish both insulin synthesis and glucose-stimulated insulin secretion. Thiazolidinediones are synthetic peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ agonists that decrease insulin resistance but, as in vitro and in vivo studies suggest, may have direct beneficial effects on pancreatic β cells. Troglitazone, for example, demonstrated improvements in insulin secretory capacity in isolated pancreatic islets from Wistar rats and a hamster β-cell line. in vivo studies reveal thiazolidinediones promote β-cell survival and regranulation as well as maintenance of β-cell mass and reduction in amyloid deposition. Clinical evidence for thiazolidinediones is largely derived from comparative trials, mainly against sulfonylureas and metformin. Data at 2 years from a number of trials are now available and establish the positive effects of thiazolidinediones on glycaemic control. Empirical evidence showing decreases in fasting plasma insulin levels with pioglitazone and rosiglitazone indicate thiazolidinediones also improve insulin sensitivity. A possible effect of thiazolidinediones on normalising asynchronous insulin secretion, as assessed in a short-term placebo-controlled study, is less established. However, recent and ongoing clinical studies are focusing attention on verifying animal and other data, which support the notion that thiazolidinediones have beneficial effects on β-cell function. These clinical studies have shown thiazolidinediones capable of preventing or delaying the development of type 2 diabetes in a high-risk population; restoring the first-phase insulin response; and improving secretory responses to oscillations in plasma glucose levels. Many of these effects appear to be independent of improvements in insulin sensitivity. Other research efforts are examining the potential cardiovascular protective effects of thiazolidinediones. Available data imply thiazolidinediones are associated with cardiovascular risk reduction, although results from large, clinical outcome trials, currently in progress, are still needed. Improved understanding of the role that declining β-cell function has in the development of type 2 diabetes has drawn attention to the need for hypoglycaemic agents that can address this process. Emerging evidence suggests thiazolidinediones offer specific benefits for preventing or delaying the decline in β-cell function and, thereby, a substrate for early intervention efforts aimed at lowering the worldwide burden of type 2 diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) is a common cause of morbidity and mortality in preterm neonates and at present its management is unclear. Over the past three decades there has been a growing use of corticosteroids in the postnatal period; first for the treatment and then, more recently, for the prevention of BPD. The first published use of corticosteroids to treat neonatal lung disease was in 1956; however, it was only in the 1980s and 1990s that their use in neonates became commonplace. Concerns about their long-term neurodevelopmental consequences arose in the late 1990s when follow-up of randomised controlled trials indicated an increased risk of cerebral palsy after postnatal dexamethasone exposure. Dexamethasone has been the most frequently used corticosteroid in neonatal units, although others, including hydrocortisone, prednisolone and methylprednisolone, have been studied, as have inhaled corticosteroids. Systematic reviews indicate that systemic corticosteroids improve respiratory function in the short term and expedite extubation in preterm neonates. However, there is a high risk of hypertension, hyperglycaemia and gastrointestinal complications in corticosteroid-treated neonates and, if administered in the first 4 days of life, an association with long-term neurodevelopmental delay. There should be emphasis on prevention of BPD by reducing the risk factors associated with its development. There is no role for use of corticosteroids in the first 4 days of life as the high risk of long-term adverse effects outweighs any likely short-term benefits. Corticosteroid use should be limited to exceptional clinical circumstances, such as a ventilator-dependent infant after the second week of life who cannot be weaned from ventilation and whose condition is worsening. If used, they should be prescribed at the lowest effective dose for the shortest possible time. Further randomised trials of low-dose corticosteroids given after the first week of life are warranted and should assess both short- and long-term outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Endothelial dysfunction and increased arterial stiffness occur early in the pathogenesis of diabetic vasculopathy. They are both powerful independent predictors of cardiovascular risk. Advances in non-invasive methodologies have led to widespread clinical investigation of these abnormalities in diabetes mellitus, generating a wealth of new knowledge concerning the mechanisms of vascular dysfunction, risk factor associations and potential treatment targets. Endothelial dysfunction primarily reflects decreased availability of nitric oxide (NO), a critical endothelium-derived vasoactive factor with vasodilatory and anti-atherosclerotic properties. Techniques for assessing endothelial dysfunction include ultrasonographic measurement of flow-mediated vasodilatation of the brachial artery and plethysmography measurement of forearm blood flow responses to vasoactive agents. Arterial stiffness may be assessed using pulse wave analysis to generate measures of pulse wave velocity, arterial compliance and wave reflection. The pathogenesis of endothelial dysfunction in type 2 diabetes is multifactorial, with principal contributors being oxidative stress, dyslipidaemia and hyperglycaemia. Elevated blood glucose levels drive production of reactive oxidant species (ROS) via multiple pathways, resulting in uncoupling of mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation and endothelial NO synthase (eNOS) activity, reducing NO availability and generating further ROS. Hyperglycaemia also contributes to accelerated arterial stiffening by increasing formation of advanced glycation end-products (AGEs), which alter vessel wall structure and function. Diabetic dyslipidaemia is characterised by accumulation of triglyceride-rich lipoproteins, small dense low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particles, reduced high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol and increased postprandial free fatty acid flux. These lipid abnormalities contribute to increasing oxidative stress and may directly inhibit eNOS activity. Although lipid-regulating agents such as HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins), fibric acid derivatives (fibrates) and fish oils are used to treat diabetic dyslipidaemia, their impact on vascular function is less clear. Studies in type 2 diabetes have yielded inconsistent results, but this may reflect sampling variation and the potential over-riding influence of oxidative stress, dysglycaemia and insulin resistance on endothelial dysfunction. Results of positive intervention trials suggest that improvement in vascular function is mediated by both lipid and non-lipid mechanisms, including anti-inflammatory, anti-oxidative and direct effects on the arterial wall. Other treatments, such as renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system antagonists, insulin sensitisers and lifestyle-based interventions, have shown beneficial effects on vascular function in type 2 diabetes. Novel approaches, targeting eNOS and AGEs, are under development, as are new lipid-regulating therapies that more effectively lower LDL-cholesterol and raise HDL-cholesterol. Combination therapy may potentially increase therapeutic efficacy and permit use of lower doses, thereby reducing the risk of adverse drug effects and interactions. Concomitant treatments that specifically target oxidative stress may also improve endothelial dysfunction in diabetes. Vascular function studies can be used to explore the therapeutic potential and mechanisms of action of new and established interventions, and provide useful surrogate measures for cardiovascular endpoints in clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic and progressive inflammatory disease that ultimately leads to disability and functional decline. Because patients usually develop RA in mid-life, they may experience its consequences for 20–30 years or longer. Proinflammatory cytokines, notably interleukin (IL)-1 and tumour necrosis factor-α, are believed to play significant pathophysiological roles. Clinical trials of biologicals that block these cytokines confirm their importance. Anakinra, a recombinant human IL-1 receptor antagonist, improves clinical signs and symptoms, and slows radiographic progression in patients with active RA. In clinical trials, patients receiving anakinra doses >1 mg/kg, whether administered alone or in combination with methotrexate, were two to three times more likely than patients receiving placebo to achieve a sustained ACR20 (American College of Rheumatology criteria) response. Notably, bone erosion slows to a greater extent and shows accelerated benefit when anakinra treatment is continued for periods beyond 24 weeks. Anakinra has a rapid onset of action, with substantial improvements in biochemical indices (C-reactive protein) seen within 1 week and clinical responses (ACR20 or joint counts) seen within 4 weeks of starting treatment. Anakinra is generally well tolerated, with injection site reactions being the most common adverse event. These reactions are generally mild and typically resolve within 2–3 weeks of treatment. The anakinra product labelling does include a warning regarding an increased risk of infections of 2% in anakinra-treated patients versus <1% in patients receiving placebo. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chronic urticaria is a common condition that can be very disabling when severe. A cause for chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU) is only infrequently identified. Potential causes include reactions to food and drugs, infections (rarely) and, apart from an increased incidence of thyroid disease, uncomplicated urticaria is not usually associated with underlying systemic disease or malignancy. About one-third of patients with CIU have circulating functional autoantibodies against the high affinity IgE receptor or against IgE, although it is not known why such antibodies are produced, or how the presence of such antibodies alters the course of the disease or response to treatment. There are only a few publications relating to childhood urticaria, but it is probably similar to the adult form, except that adult urticaria is more common. The diagnosis is based on patient history and it is vital to spend time documenting this in detail. Extensive laboratory tests are not required in the vast majority of patients. Chronic urticaria resolves spontaneously in 30–55% of patients within 5 years, but it can persist for many years. Treatment is aimed firstly at avoiding underlying causative or exacerbating factors. Histamine H1 receptor antagonists remain the mainstay of oral treatment for all forms of urticaria. The newer low-sedating antihistamines desloratadine, fexofenadine, levocetirizine and mizolastine should be tried first. Sedating antihistamines have more adverse effects but are useful if symptoms are causing sleep disturbance. Low-dose dopexin is effective and especially suitable for patients with associated depression. There is controversy as to whether the addition of an histamine H2 receptor antagonist or a leukotriene antagonist is helpful. For CIU, second-line agents include ciclosporin (cyclosporine) [which is effective in approximately 75% of patients], short courses of oral corticosteroids, intravenous immunoglobulins and plasmapheresis, although the last two were found to be beneficial in small trials only. Treatments for CIU with only limited or anecdotal supportive evidence include sulphasalazine, methotrexate, stanazol, rofecoxib and cyclophosphamide. The efficacy of photo(chemo)therapy is controversial. Physical urticarias may respond to H1 receptor antagonists, although in delayed pressure urticaria, and cold, solar and aquagenic urticaria, the response may be disappointing. Second-line agents for physical urticarias vary depending on the urticaria and most have limited supportive evidence. The potential for spontaneous resolution, the variation in the disease activity and the unpredictable nature of the disease makes the efficacy of treatments difficult to assess. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is becoming a major health problem associated with excess morbidity and mortality. As the prevalence of type 2 diabetes is rapidly increasing, prevention of the disease should be considered as a key objective in the near future. Besides lifestyle changes, various pharmacological treatments have proven their efficacy in placebo-controlled clinical trials, including antidiabetic drugs such as metformin, acarbose and troglitazone, or antiobesity agents such as orlistat. Arterial hypertension, a clinical entity in which insulin resistance is common, is strongly associated with type 2 diabetes and may precede the disease by several years. While antihypertensive agents such as diuretics or β-adrenoceptor antagonists may worsen insulin resistance and impair glucose tolerance, newer antihypertensive agents exert neutral or even slightly positive metabolic effects. Numerous clinical trials have investigated the effects of ACE inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor antagonists (ARAs) on insulin sensitivity in hypertensive patients, with or without diabetes, with no consistent results. Almost half of the studies with ACE inhibitors in hypertensive nondiabetic individuals demonstrated a slight but significant increase in insulin sensitivity as assessed by insulin-stimulated glucose disposal during a euglycaemic hyperinsulinaemic clamp, while the other half failed to reveal any significant change. The effects of ARAs on insulin sensitivity are neutral in most studies. Mechanisms of improvement of glucose tolerance and insulin sensitivity through the inhibition of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) are complex. They may include improvement of blood flow and microcirculation in skeletal muscles and, thereby, enhancement of insulin and glucose delivery to the insulin-sensitive tissues, facilitating insulin signalling at the cellular level and improvement of insulin secretion by the β cells. Six recent large-scale clinical studies reported a remarkably consistent reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes in hypertensive patients treated with either ACE inhibitors or ARAs for 3–6 years, compared with a thiazide diuretic, β-adrenoceptor antagonist, the calcium channel antagonist amlodipine or even placebo. The relative risk reduction averaged 14% (p = 0.034) in the CAPPP (Captopril Prevention Project) with captopril compared with a thiazide or β1-adrenoceptor antagonist, 34% (p < 0.001) in the HOPE (Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation) study with ramipril compared with placebo, 30% (p < 0.001) in the ALLHAT (Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial) with lisinopril compared with chlortalidone, 25% (p < 0.001) in the LIFE (Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension study) with losartan compared with atenolol, and 25% (p = 0.09) in the SCOPE (Study on Cognition and Prognosis in the Elderly) with candesartan cilexetil compared with placebo, and 23% (p < 0.0001) in the VALUE (Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-term Use Evaluation) trial with valsartan compared with amlodipine. All these studies considered the development of diabetes as a secondary endpoint, except the HOPE trial where it was a post hoc analysis. These encouraging observations led to the initiation of two large, prospective, placebo-controlled randomised clinical trials whose primary outcome is the prevention of type 2 diabetes: the DREAM (Diabetes REduction Approaches with ramipril and rosiglitazone Medications) trial with the ACE inhibitor ramipril and the NAVIGATOR (Nateglinide And Valsartan in Impaired Glucose Tolerance Outcomes Research) trial with the ARA valsartan. Finally, ONTARGET (ONgoing Telmisartan Alone and in combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial) will also investigate as a secondary endpoint whether it is possible to prevent the development of type 2 diabetes by blocking the RAS with either an ACE inhibitor or an ARA or a combination of both. Thus, the recent consistent observations of a 14–34% reduction of the development of diabetes in hypertensive patients receiving ACE inhibitors or ARAs are exciting. From a theoretical point of view, they emphasise that there are many aspects of the pathogenesis, prevention and treatment of type 2 diabetes that still need to be uncovered. From a practical point of view, they may offer a new strategy to reduce the ongoing epidemic and burden of type 2 diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gefitinib (Iressa™), the first commercially available epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase (EGFR-TK) inhibitor, is indicated in the management of patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, approved uses differ between countries; in most markets, gefitinib is approved for third-line use only (e.g. the US, Canada and Switzerland), although in some it is approved for both second- and third-line use (e.g. Japan and Australia) and, additionally, in patients considered unsuitable for chemotherapy (e.g. Indonesia and the Philippines). Few third-line treatment options exist for patients with inoperable advanced NSCLC who have failed both platinum-based and docetaxel chemotherapies. Gefitinib represents a significant advance in the treatment of this population; a once-daily, oral dosage of 250 mg/day was well tolerated, produced objective tumour responses and disease stabilisation, and improved disease-related symptoms and quality of life. It also produced overall survival outcomes that compared favourably with historical outcomes in a similar group of patients treated with three or four different chemotherapy regimens. These findings have been supported by observations from a global compassionate-use programme. Ongoing or planned clinical trials are designed to confirm and/or further define the role of the drug in the above and other clinical settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When kidney disease of any aetiology results in substantial loss of nephrons, a common clinical syndrome, characterised by hypertension, proteinuria and a progressive decline in renal function, ensues. This observation suggests that common mechanisms may contribute to progressive renal injury and that therapeutic interventions that inhibit these common pathways may afford renal protection. Research to date has identified several mechanisms that may contribute to progressive renal injury including glomerular haemodynamic changes, multiple effects of angiotensin II and detrimental effects of excessive filtration of plasma proteins by injured glomeruli. Clinical trials over the past decade have identified several interventions that are effective in slowing the rate of progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD). The use of ACE inhibitors, angiotensin receptor antagonists or a combination of the two should be regarded as fundamental to any therapy for slowing the rate of CKD progression. Hypertension should be treated aggressively to achieve a blood pressure target of <130/80mm Hg. Reduction of proteinuria to <0.5 g/day should be regarded as an independent therapeutic goal. Although inconclusive, there is some evidence to support moderate dietary protein restriction to 0.6 g/kg/day in appropriate patients. Hyperlipidaemia may contribute to CKD progression and should be treated to reduce cardiovascular risk and potentially improve renal protection. Smoking cessation should be encouraged and, where necessary, assisted. Among diabetic patients tight glycaemic control should be achieved (glycosylated haemoglobin <7%). These interventions are simple and relatively inexpensive. If applied to all patients with CKD they will result in substantial slowing of renal function decline in many patients and thereby reduce the number who progress to end-stage renal disease and require renal replacement therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) is a chronic progressive cholestatic disease where there is progressive, granulomatous destruction of the middle-sized bile ducts. The disease affects mainly middle-aged women. The association with other autoimmune diseases and the widespread disturbance of the humoral and cellular immune systems has led to the inclusion of PBC as an autoimmune disease. However, there are several lines of evidence that suggest that both host and environmental factors are implicated in triggering the disease. Without a clear aetiology, it is difficult to find a logical approach to treatment. Well constructed clinical trials are difficult to run because of the variable and long natural history of the disease; and suitable endpoints are difficult to define and validated surrogate endpoints have not been defined. The only drug licensed for use is the bile acid, ursodeoxycholic acid. This drug is associated with significant biochemical improvement and improvement in the immunological disturbances (including a reduction in the titre of the diagnostic autoantibody, antimitochondrial antibody), but the effect on survival and histological progression is still controversial. There is little effect on symptoms. Nonetheless, its safety and lack of toxicity have meant that it has become the drug of choice and most studies now assess the effect of additional treatments. Many other agents have been studied. There is some evidence, from prospective, controlled studies, for a beneficial effect of azathioprine and ciclosporin (cyclosporine); evidence for a beneficial effect of corticosteroids and of mycophenolate is limited and there is little firm evidence for a beneficial effect of methotrexate, penicillamine, thalidomide or colchicine. Other treatments being evaluated include fibric acid derivatives (fibrates), NSAIDs and leukotriene antagonists. Liver transplantation remains the only option for end-stage disease but recurrence of disease may be found in the graft. Experimental therapies include antiretroviral therapy. Symptomatic treatment is required for pruritus and the mainstays are the bile acid binding agents such as colestyramine. For those who are intolerant of the drug or where it is ineffective, rifampicin and naltrexone may be effective. There is no effective treatment for the associated lethargy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Manidipine is a lipophilic, third-generation dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonist with a high degree of selectivity for the vasculature, thereby inducing marked peripheral vasodilation with negligible cardiodepression. In addition, manidipine does not significantly affect norepinephrine levels, suggesting a lack of sympathetic activation. It has a gradual onset of action and a long duration of action enabling once daily administration. Furthermore, manidipine dilates both the efferent and the afferent renal arterioles and appears to have beneficial renal effects unrelated to its antihypertensive effect. Once-daily oral manidipine is an effective and generally well tolerated antihypertensive agent for younger and elderly adult patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension. In particular, in a large double-blind trial, the incidence of ankle oedema was significantly lower in manidipine than in amlodipine recipients. Manidipine is also effective in hypertensive patients with comorbidities, such as type 2 diabetes mellitus and/or renal impairment, and appears to improve insulin sensitivity without affecting metabolic function. Thus, manidipine represents a first-line treatment option for patients with essential mild-to-moderate hypertension. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nicorandil (Adancor®, Angicor®, Dancor®, Nikoril® [Europe], Ikorel® [Europe and Oceania], Sigmart® [Japan, Korea and Taiwan]) is an adenosine triphosphate (ATP)-sensitive potassium (KATP) channel agonist with nitrate-like properties used in the management of stable angina pectoris. With well established monotherapeutic antianginal activity and a beneficial effect (when added to optimal antianginal therapy) on clinical outcomes in high-risk patients with stable angina, twice-daily oral nicorandil is a useful alternative or addition to other antianginal therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cefdinir (Omnicef®) is an oral third-generation cephalosporin with good in vitro activity against many pathogens commonly causative in community-acquired infections. The drug provides good coverage against Haemophilus influenzae, Moraxella catarrhalis and penicillin-susceptible Streptococcus pneumoniae, the most common respiratory tract pathogens. Cefdinir is stable to hydrolysis by commonly occurring plasmid-mediated β-lactamases and retains good activity against β-lactamase-producing strains of H. influenzae and M. catarrhalis. The drug distributes into various tissues (e.g. sinus and tonsil) and fluids (e.g. middle ear), and has a pharmacokinetic profile that allows for once- or twice-daily administration. Cefdinir, administered for 5 or 10 days, has shown good clinical and bacteriological efficacy in the treatment of a wide range of mild-to-moderate infections of the respiratory tract and skin in adults, adolescents and paediatric patients in randomised, controlled trials. In adults and adolescents, cefdinir is an effective treatment for both lower (acute bacterial exacerbations of chronic bronchitis [ABECB], community-acquired pneumonia) and upper (acute bacterial rhinosinusitis, streptococcal pharyngitis) respiratory tract infections, and uncomplicated skin infections. Its bacteriological and clinical efficacy in patients with lower respiratory tract infections was equivalent to that of comparator agents (cefprozil [bacteriological only], loracarbef, cefuroxime axetil and cefaclor). In one trial in patients with ABECB, cefdinir produced a higher rate of clinical cure than cefprozil (95% CIs indicated nonequivalence). Cefdinir also produced good clinical and bacteriological responses equivalent to responses with amoxicillin/clavulanic acid in patients with acute bacterial rhinosinusitis. In addition, it was at least as effective as penicillin V (phenoxymethylpenicillin) in streptococcal pharyngitis/tonsillitis and as effective as cefalexin in uncomplicated skin infections. In paediatric patients aged ≥6 months, cefdinir showed similar efficacy to that of amoxicillin/clavulanic acid or cefprozil in acute otitis media, and cefalexin in uncomplicated skin infections. Cefdinir given for 5 or 10 days was at least as effective as penicillin V for 10 days in patients with streptococcal pharyngitis/tonsillitis. Cefdinir is usually well tolerated. Diarrhoea was the most common adverse event in trials in all age groups. Although the incidence of diarrhoea in cefdinir recipients was generally higher than in adults and adolescents treated with comparators, discontinuation rates due to adverse events were generally similar for cefdinir and comparator groups. In conclusion, cefdinir is a third-generation cephalosporin with a broad spectrum of antibacterial activity encompassing pathogens that are commonly causative in infections of the respiratory tract or skin and skin structure. Depending on the infection being treated, cefdinir can be administered as a convenient once- or twice-daily 5- or 10-day regimen. Clinical evidence indicates that cefdinir is an effective and generally well tolerated drug with superior taste over comparator antibacterial agents and is therefore a good option for the treatment of adults, adolescents and paediatric patients with specific mild-to-moderate respiratory tract or skin infections, particularly in areas where β-lactamase-mediated resistance among common community-acquired pathogens is a concern. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tinzaparin sodium (tinzaparin; innohep®) is a low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) formed by the enzymatic degradation of porcine unfractionated heparin (UFH). In clinical trials, once-daily subcutaneous (SC) tinzaparin was effective and generally well tolerated in the prophylaxis and treatment of thromboembolic disease. SC tinzaparin 75 anti-Xa IU/kg/day showed similar thromboprophylactic efficacy to adjusted-dosage oral warfarin in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty; in patients undergoing knee replacement, the incidence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) was significantly lower with tinzaparin. The drug had similar efficacy to equivalent-dosage SC enoxaparin sodium in orthopaedic surgery. In patients undergoing general surgery, SC tinzaparin 3500 anti-Xa IU/day was of equivalent thromboprophylactic efficacy to SC UFH 5000IU twice daily. Encouraging preliminary results have been obtained with tinzaparin in the prevention of DVT in patients with complete motor paralysis. In the initial treatment of acute proximal DVT and pulmonary embolism, SC tinzaparin 175 anti-Xa IU/kg/day was at least as effective as adjusted-dosage intravenous (IV) UFH. In the outpatient treatment of venous thromboembolism, tinzaparin has demonstrated similar efficacy to dalteparin sodium (dalteparin) and warfarin. Tinzaparin was effective in preventing clotting in haemodialysis circuits; the anticoagulant efficacy of tinzaparin in patients undergoing haemodialysis was similar to that of SC dalteparin and similar to or less than (although in this case the tinzaparin dose was too low for sufficient anticoagulant efficacy) that of IV UFH. Advantages of tinzaparin over UFH and warfarin include ease of administration and lack of need for laboratory monitoring. Tinzaparin is more cost effective than UFH in the treatment of established thromboembolic disease, and home-based treatment with tinzaparin may offer greater cost benefits than hospital-based therapy. Tinzaparin is well tolerated, including in elderly patients and those with renal impairment receiving long-term treatment. Incidences of major bleeding complications were low and reports of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia were infrequent in clinical studies. In conclusion, tinzaparin is a valuable LMWH in the prophylaxis and management of thromboembolic disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]