Search

ImportanceSoy isoflavone supplements are used to treat several chronic diseases, although the data supporting their use are limited. Some data suggest that supplementation with soy isoflavone may be an effective treatment for patients with poor asthma control.ObjectiveTo determine whether a soy isoflavone supplement improves asthma control in adolescent and adult patients with poorly controlled disease.Design, setting, and participantsMulticenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted between May 2010 and August 2012 at 19 adult and pediatric pulmonary and allergy centers in the American Lung Association Asthma Clinical Research Centers network. Three hundred eighty-six adults and children aged 12 years or older with symptomatic asthma while taking a controller medicine and low dietary soy intake were randomized, and 345 (89%) completed spirometry at week 24.InterventionsParticipants were randomly assigned to receive soy isoflavone supplement containing 100 mg of total isoflavones (n=193) or matching placebo (n=193) in 2 divided doses administered daily for 24 weeks.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome measure was change in forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) at 24 weeks. Secondary outcome measures were symptoms, episodes of poor asthma control, Asthma Control Test score (range, 5-25; higher scores indicate better control), and systemic and airway biomarkers of inflammation.ResultsMean changes in prebronchodilator FEV1 over 24 weeks were 0.03 L (95% CI, -0.01 to 0.08 L) in the placebo group and 0.01 L (95% CI, -0.07 to 0.07 L) in the soy isoflavone group, which were not significantly different (P = .36). Mean changes in symptom scores on the Asthma Control Test (placebo, 1.98 [95% CI, 1.42-2.54] vs soy isoflavones, 2.20 [95% CI, 1.53-2.87]; positive values indicate a reduction in symptoms), number of episodes of poor asthma control (placebo, 3.3 [95% CI, 2.7-4.1] vs soy isoflavones, 3.0 [95% CI, 2.4-3.7]), and changes in exhaled nitric oxide (placebo, -3.48 ppb [95% CI, -5.99 to -0.97 ppb] vs soy isoflavones, 1.39 ppb [95% CI, -1.73 to 4.51 ppb]) did not significantly improve more with the soy isoflavone supplement than with placebo. Mean plasma genistein level increased from 4.87 ng/mL to 37.67 ng/mL (P

Context: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) licensed recombinant human coagulation factor VIIa (rFVIIa) on March 25, 1999, for bleeding in patients with hemophilia A or B and inhibitors to factors VIII or IX. Use in patients without hemophilia has been increasing since licensure., Objective: To review serious thromboembolic adverse events (AEs) reported to the FDA's Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS)., Design, Setting, and Patients: The AERS database was reviewed from March 25, 1999, through December 31, 2004, for thromboembolic AE reports with rFVIIa. The AERS database includes US and non-US spontaneous AE reports from both approved (specific indications for patients with hemophilia) and unlabeled uses. It also includes serious AEs in patients enrolled in postlicensure clinical trials who received rFVIIa. Manufacturer reporting to FDA is mandatory, but primary notification from clinicians and others to FDA or manufacturers is voluntary for spontaneous reports; therefore, AERS underrepresents actual event occurrences., Main Outcome Measure: Reported thromboembolic events occurring in patients administered rFVIIa., Results: A total of 431 AE reports for rFVIIa were found, of which 168 reports described 185 thromboembolic events. Seventeen events occurred in patients with hemophilia and 59 occurred in patients enrolled in postlicensure trials. Unlabeled indications accounted for 151 of the reports, most with active bleeding (n = 115). Reported AEs were thromboembolic cerebrovascular accident (n = 39), acute myocardial infarction (n = 34), other arterial thromboses (n = 26), pulmonary embolism (n = 32), other venous thromboses (including deep vein thrombosis) (n = 42), and clotted devices (n = 10). In 36 (72%) of 50 reported deaths, the probable cause of death was the thromboembolic event. In 144 patients with timing information, 73 events (52%) occurred in the first 24 hours after the last dose (30 events within 2 hours). Sixty-four reports (38%) noted concomitant use of hemostatic agents. Most reports lacked sufficient information to evaluate potential dosage associations., Conclusions: Most reported thromboembolic AEs followed the use of rFVIIa for unlabeled indications and occurred in arterial and venous systems, often resulting in serious morbidity and mortality. Analysis of the relationship between AEs and rFVIIa is hindered by concomitant medications, preexisting medical conditions, confounding by indication, and inherent limitations of passive surveillance. Randomized controlled trials are needed to establish the safety and efficacy of rFVIIa in patients without hemophilia.

Context: In June 2003, the US Food and Drug Administration licensed a trivalent live, attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV-T) for intranasal administration to healthy persons 5 to 49 years of age. Although prelicensure testing involved 20 228 vaccinees, clinical trials were not of sufficient size to detect rare adverse events reliably., Objective: To identify adverse events reported following LAIV-T administration after licensure., Design, Setting, and Participants: All adverse events reported to the US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) during the 2003-2004 and the 2004-2005 influenza seasons., Main Outcome Measures: Numbers and proportions of reported adverse events and reporting rates of adverse events per 100,000 vaccinees., Results: Approximately 2,500,000 persons received LAIV-T during the first 2 postlicensure seasons. As of August 16, 2005, VAERS received 460 adverse event reports for vaccinations received from August 2003 through July 2005. No fatalities were reported. There were 7 reports of possible anaphylaxis, 2 reports of Guillain-Barré syndrome, 1 report of Bell palsy, and 8 reports of asthma exacerbation among individuals with a prior asthma history. Events in individuals for whom the vaccine was not indicated accounted for 73 reports (16%)., Conclusions: Reports to VAERS in the first 2 seasons of LAIV-T use did not identify any unexpected serious risks with this vaccine when used according to approved indications. Like many vaccines and other medical products, LAIV-T may rarely cause anaphylaxis. Secondary transmission of the vaccine virus merits further investigation. Reports of asthma exacerbations in vaccinees with prior asthma history highlight the risks of vaccine use inconsistent with approved labeling.