Search

Background: About a third of women receiving pethidine for labour pain subsequently require an epidural, which provides effective pain relief but increases the risk of instrumental vaginal delivery. Remifentanil patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) in labour is an alternative to pethidine, but is not widely used. We aimed to evaluate epidural analgesia progression among women using remifentanil PCA compared with pethidine.Methods: We did an open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial in 14 UK maternity units. We included women aged 16 years or older, beyond 37 weeks' gestation, in labour with a singleton cephalic presentation, and who requested opioid pain relief. We randomly assigned eligible participants (1:1) to either the intravenous remifentanil PCA group (40 μg bolus on demand with a 2 min lockout) or the intramuscular pethidine group (100 mg every 4 h, up to 400 mg in 24 h), using a web-based or telephone randomisation service with a minimisation algorithm for parity, maternal age, ethnicity, and mode of labour onset. Because of the differences in routes of drug administration, study participants and health-care providers were not masked to the group allocation. The primary outcome was the proportion of women who received epidural analgesia after enrolment for pain relief in labour. Primary analyses were unadjusted and analysed by the intention-to-treat principle. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN29654603.Findings: Between May 13, 2014, and Sept 2, 2016, 201 women were randomly assigned to the remifentanil PCA group and 200 to the pethidine group. One participant in the pethidine group withdrew consent, leaving 199 for analyses. The proportions of epidural conversion were 19% (39 of 201) in the remifentanil PCA group and 41% (81 of 199) in the pethidine group (risk ratio 0·48, 95% CI 0·34-0·66; p<0·0001). There were no serious adverse events or drug reactions directly attributable to either analgesic during the study.Interpretation: Intravenous remifentanil PCA halved the proportion of epidural conversions compared with intramuscular pethidine. This finding challenges routine pethidine use as standard of care in labour.Funding: National Institute for Health Research Clinician Scientist Award. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Treatment-resistant major depressive disorder is common; repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) by use of high-frequency (10 Hz) left-side dorsolateral prefrontal cortex stimulation is an evidence-based treatment for this disorder. Intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) is a newer form of rTMS that can be delivered in 3 min, versus 37·5 min for a standard 10 Hz treatment session. We aimed to establish the clinical effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of iTBS compared with standard 10 Hz rTMS in adults with treatment-resistant depression.Methods: In this randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority clinical trial, we recruited patients who were referred to specialty neurostimulation centres based at three Canadian university hospitals (Centre for Addiction and Mental Health and Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, ON, and University of British Columbia Hospital, Vancouver, BC). Participants were aged 18-65 years, were diagnosed with a current treatment-resistant major depressive episode or could not tolerate at least two antidepressants in the current episode, were receiving stable antidepressant medication doses for at least 4 weeks before baseline, and had an HRSD-17 score of at least 18. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) to treatment groups (10 Hz rTMS or iTBS) by use of a random permuted block method, with stratification by site and number of adequate trials in which the antidepressants were unsuccessful. Treatment was delivered open-label but investigators and outcome assessors were masked to treatment groups. Participants were treated with 10 Hz rTMS or iTBS to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, administered on 5 days a week for 4-6 weeks. The primary outcome measure was change in 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD-17) score, with a non-inferiority margin of 2·25 points. For the primary outcome measure, we did a per-protocol analysis of all participants who were randomly allocated to groups and who attained the primary completion point of 4 weeks. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01887782.Findings: Between Sept 3, 2013, and Oct 3, 2016, we randomly allocated 205 participants to receive 10 Hz rTMS and 209 participants to receive iTBS. 192 (94%) participants in the 10 Hz rTMS group and 193 (92%) in the iTBS group were assessed for the primary outcome after 4-6 weeks of treatment. HRSD-17 scores improved from 23·5 (SD 4·4) to 13·4 (7·8) in the 10 Hz rTMS group and from 23·6 (4·3) to 13·4 (7·9) in the iTBS group (adjusted difference 0·103 [corrected], lower 95% CI -1·16; p=0·0011), which indicated non-inferiority of iTBS. Self-rated intensity of pain associated with treatment was greater in the iTBS group than in the 10 Hz rTMS group (mean score on verbal analogue scale 3·8 [SD 2·0] vs 3·4 [2·0] out of 10; p=0·011). Dropout rates did not differ between groups (10 Hz rTMS: 13 [6%] of 205 participants; iTBS: 16 [8%] of 209 participants); p=0·6004). The most common treatment-related adverse event was headache in both groups (10 Hz rTMS: 131 [64%] of 204; iTBS: 136 [65%] of 208).Interpretation: In patients with treatment-resistant depression, iTBS was non-inferior to 10 Hz rTMS for the treatment of depression. Both treatments had low numbers of dropouts and similar side-effects, safety, and tolerability profiles. By use of iTBS, the number of patients treated per day with current rTMS devices can be increased several times without compromising clinical effectiveness.Funding: Canadian Institutes of Health Research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is a need to increase access to surgical treatments in African countries, but perioperative complications represent a major global health-care burden. There are few studies describing surgical outcomes in Africa.Methods: We did a 7-day, international, prospective, observational cohort study of patients aged 18 years and older undergoing any inpatient surgery in 25 countries in Africa (the African Surgical Outcomes Study). We aimed to recruit as many hospitals as possible using a convenience sampling survey, and required data from at least ten hospitals per country (or half the surgical centres if there were fewer than ten hospitals) and data for at least 90% of eligible patients from each site. Each country selected one recruitment week between February and May, 2016. The primary outcome was in-hospital postoperative complications, assessed according to predefined criteria and graded as mild, moderate, or severe. Data were presented as median (IQR), mean (SD), or n (%), and compared using t tests. This study is registered on the South African National Health Research Database (KZ_2015RP7_22) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03044899).Findings: We recruited 11 422 patients (median 29 [IQR 10-70]) from 247 hospitals during the national cohort weeks. Hospitals served a median population of 810 000 people (IQR 200 000-2 000 000), with a combined number of specialist surgeons, obstetricians, and anaesthetists totalling 0·7 (0·2-1·9) per 100 000 population. Hospitals did a median of 212 (IQR 65-578) surgical procedures per 100 000 population each year. Patients were younger (mean age 38·5 years [SD 16·1]), with a lower risk profile (American Society of Anesthesiologists median score 1 [IQR 1-2]) than reported in high-income countries. 1253 (11%) patients were infected with HIV, 6504 procedures (57%) were urgent or emergent, and the most common procedure was caesarean delivery (3792 patients, 33%). Postoperative complications occurred in 1977 (18·2%, 95% CI 17·4-18·9]) of 10 885 patients. 239 (2·1%) of 11 193 patients died, 225 (94·1%) after the day of surgery. Infection was the most common complication (1156 [10·2%] of 10 970 patients), of whom 112 (9·7%) died.Interpretation: Despite a low-risk profile and few postoperative complications, patients in Africa were twice as likely to die after surgery when compared with the global average for postoperative deaths. Initiatives to increase access to surgical treatments in Africa therefore should be coupled with improved surveillance for deteriorating physiology in patients who develop postoperative complications, and the resources necessary to achieve this objective.Funding: Medical Research Council of South Africa. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Major depressive disorder is one of the most common, burdensome, and costly psychiatric disorders worldwide in adults. Pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments are available; however, because of inadequate resources, antidepressants are used more frequently than psychological interventions. Prescription of these agents should be informed by the best available evidence. Therefore, we aimed to update and expand our previous work to compare and rank antidepressants for the acute treatment of adults with unipolar major depressive disorder.Methods: We did a systematic review and network meta-analysis. We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, Embase, LILACS database, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, PsycINFO, the websites of regulatory agencies, and international registers for published and unpublished, double-blind, randomised controlled trials from their inception to Jan 8, 2016. We included placebo-controlled and head-to-head trials of 21 antidepressants used for the acute treatment of adults (≥18 years old and of both sexes) with major depressive disorder diagnosed according to standard operationalised criteria. We excluded quasi-randomised trials and trials that were incomplete or included 20% or more of participants with bipolar disorder, psychotic depression, or treatment-resistant depression; or patients with a serious concomitant medical illness. We extracted data following a predefined hierarchy. In network meta-analysis, we used group-level data. We assessed the studies' risk of bias in accordance to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, and certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. Primary outcomes were efficacy (response rate) and acceptability (treatment discontinuations due to any cause). We estimated summary odds ratios (ORs) using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42012002291.Findings: We identified 28 552 citations and of these included 522 trials comprising 116 477 participants. In terms of efficacy, all antidepressants were more effective than placebo, with ORs ranging between 2·13 (95% credible interval [CrI] 1·89-2·41) for amitriptyline and 1·37 (1·16-1·63) for reboxetine. For acceptability, only agomelatine (OR 0·84, 95% CrI 0·72-0·97) and fluoxetine (0·88, 0·80-0·96) were associated with fewer dropouts than placebo, whereas clomipramine was worse than placebo (1·30, 1·01-1·68). When all trials were considered, differences in ORs between antidepressants ranged from 1·15 to 1·55 for efficacy and from 0·64 to 0·83 for acceptability, with wide CrIs on most of the comparative analyses. In head-to-head studies, agomelatine, amitriptyline, escitalopram, mirtazapine, paroxetine, venlafaxine, and vortioxetine were more effective than other antidepressants (range of ORs 1·19-1·96), whereas fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, reboxetine, and trazodone were the least efficacious drugs (0·51-0·84). For acceptability, agomelatine, citalopram, escitalopram, fluoxetine, sertraline, and vortioxetine were more tolerable than other antidepressants (range of ORs 0·43-0·77), whereas amitriptyline, clomipramine, duloxetine, fluvoxamine, reboxetine, trazodone, and venlafaxine had the highest dropout rates (1·30-2·32). 46 (9%) of 522 trials were rated as high risk of bias, 380 (73%) trials as moderate, and 96 (18%) as low; and the certainty of evidence was moderate to very low.Interpretation: All antidepressants were more efficacious than placebo in adults with major depressive disorder. Smaller differences between active drugs were found when placebo-controlled trials were included in the analysis, whereas there was more variability in efficacy and acceptability in head-to-head trials. These results should serve evidence-based practice and inform patients, physicians, guideline developers, and policy makers on the relative merits of the different antidepressants.Funding: National Institute for Health Research Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre and the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Canakinumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin-1β, reduces inflammation and cardiovascular event rates with no effect on lipid concentrations. However, it is uncertain which patient groups benefit the most from treatment and whether reductions in the inflammatory biomarker high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) correlate with clinical benefits for individual patients.Methods: The Canakinumab Anti-Inflammatory Thrombosis Outcomes Study (CANTOS) used computer-generated codes to randomly allocate 10 061 men and women with a history of myocardial infarction to placebo or one of three doses of canakinumab (50 mg, 150 mg, or 300 mg) given subcutaneously once every 3 months. In a prespecified secondary analysis designed to address the relationship of hsCRP reduction to event reduction in CANTOS, we evaluated the effects of canakinumab on rates of major adverse cardiovascular events, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality according to on-treatment concentrations of hsCRP. We used multivariable modelling to adjust for baseline factors associated with achieved hsCRP and multiple sensitivity analyses to address the magnitude of residual confounding. The median follow-up was 3·7 years. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01327846.Findings: Baseline clinical characteristics did not define patient groups with greater or lesser cardiovascular benefits when treated with canakinumab. However, trial participants allocated to canakinumab who achieved hsCRP concentrations less than 2 mg/L had a 25% reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events (multivariable adjusted hazard ratio [HRadj]=0·75, 95% CI 0·66-0·85, p<0·0001), whereas no significant benefit was observed among those with on-treatment hsCRP concentrations of 2 mg/L or above (HRadj=0·90, 0·79-1·02, p=0·11). For those treated with canakinumab who achieved on-treatment hsCRP concentrations less than 2 mg/L, cardiovascular mortality (HRadj=0·69, 95% CI 0·56-0·85, p=0·0004) and all-cause mortality (HRadj=0·69, 0·58-0·81, p<0·0001) were both reduced by 31%, whereas no significant reduction in these endpoints was observed among those treated with canakinumab who achieved hsCRP concentrations of 2 mg/L or above. Similar differential effects were found in analyses of the trial prespecified secondary cardiovascular endpoint (which additionally included hospitalisation for unstable angina requiring unplanned revascularisation) and in sensitivity analyses alternatively based on median reductions in hsCRP, on 50% or greater reductions in hsCRP, on the median percent reduction in hsCRP, in dose-specific analyses, and in analyses using a causal inference approach to estimate the effect of treatment among individuals who would achieve a targeted hsCRP concentration.Interpretation: The magnitude of hsCRP reduction following a single dose of canakinumab might provide a simple clinical method to identify individuals most likely to accrue the largest benefit from continued treatment. These data further suggest that lower is better for inflammation reduction with canakinumab.Funding: Novartis Pharmaceuticals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Carotid baroreflex activation lowers blood pressure and might have potential application for the treatment of resistant hypertension. We did a proof-of-principle trial with a novel endovascular baroreceptor amplification device, MobiusHD (Vascular Dynamics, Mountain View, CA, USA), in patients with resistant hypertension.Methods: CALM-FIM_EUR was a prospective, first-in-human, open-label study done at six European centres. Eligible patients were adults with resistant hypertension (office systolic blood pressure ≥160 mm Hg despite taking at least three antihypertensive agents, including a diuretic). MobiusHD devices were implanted unilaterally in the internal carotid artery. The primary endpoint was the incidence of serious adverse events at 6 months. Secondary endpoints included changes in office and 24 h ambulatory blood pressure. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01911897.Findings: Between December, 2013, and February, 2016, 30 patients were enrolled and underwent successful implantation. Mean age was 52 years (SD 12), 15 patients (50%) were men, and mean antihypertensive use was 4·4 drugs (1·4). Mean office blood pressure was 184/109 mm Hg (18/14) at baseline and was reduced by 24/12 mm Hg (13-34/6-18) at 6 months (p=0·0003 for systolic and p=0·0001 diastolic blood pressure). Mean baseline 24 h ambulatory blood pressure was 166/100 mm Hg (17/14) at baseline and was reduced by 21/12 mm Hg (14-29/7-16) at 6 months (p<0·0001 for systolic and diastolic blood pressure). Five serious adverse events had occurred in four patients (13%) at 6 months: hypotension (n=2), worsening hypertension (n=1), intermittent claudication (n=1) and wound infection (n=1).Interpretation: In patients with resistant hypertension, endovascular baroreceptor amplification with the MobiusHD device substantially lowered blood pressure with an acceptable safety profile. Randomised, double-blind, sham-controlled trials are warranted to investigate the use of this treatment further.Funding: Vascular Dynamics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Impaired contractility is a feature of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. We assessed the pharmacokinetics and effects on cardiac function and structure of the cardiac myosin activator, omecamtiv mecarbil.Methods: In this randomised, double-blind study, done at 87 sites in 13 countries, we recruited patients with stable, symptomatic chronic heart failure and left ventricular ejection fraction 40% or lower. Patients were randomly assigned equally, via an interactive web response system, to receive 25 mg oral omecamtiv mecarbil twice daily (fixed-dose group), 25 mg twice daily titrated to 50 mg twice daily guided by pharmacokinetics (pharmacokinetic-titration group), or placebo for 20 weeks. We assessed the maximum concentration of omecamtiv mecarbil in plasma (primary endpoint) and changes in cardiac function and ventricular diameters. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01786512.Findings: From March 17, 2014, to March 5, 2015, we enrolled 150 patients in the fixed-dose omecamtiv mecarbil group and 149 in the pharmacokinetic-titration and placebo groups. Mean maximum concentration of omecamtiv mecarbil at 12 weeks was 200 (SD 71) ng/mL in the fixed-dose group and 318 (129) ng/mL in the pharmacokinetic-titration group. For the pharmacokinetic-titration group versus placebo group at 20 weeks, least square mean differences were as follows: systolic ejection time 25 ms (95% CI 18-32, p<0·0001), stroke volume 3·6 mL (0·5-6·7, p=0·0217), left ventricular end-systolic diameter -1·8 mm (-2·9 to -0·6, p=0·0027), left ventricular end-diastolic diameter -1·3 mm, (-2·3 to 0·3, p=0·0128), heart rate -3·0 beats per min (-5·1 to -0·8, p=0·0070), and N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide concentration in plasma -970 pg/mL (-1672 to -268, p=0·0069). The frequency of adverse clinical events did not differ between groups.Interpretation: Omecamtiv mecarbil dosing guided by pharmacokinetics achieved plasma concentrations associated with improved cardiac function and decreased ventricular diameter.Funding: Amgen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: CTX0E03 is an immortalised human neural stem-cell line from which a drug product (CTX-DP) was developed for allogeneic therapy. Dose-dependent improvement in sensorimotor function in rats implanted with CTX-DP 4 weeks after middle cerebral artery occlusion stroke prompted investigation of the safety and tolerability of this treatment in stroke patients.Methods: We did an open-label, single-site, dose-escalation study. Men aged 60 years or older with stable disability (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale [NIHSS] score ≥6 and modified Rankin Scale score 2-4) 6-60 months after ischaemic stroke were implanted with single doses of 2 million, 5 million, 10 million, or 20 million cells by stereotactic ipsilateral putamen injection. Clinical and brain imaging data were collected over 2 years. The primary endpoint was safety (adverse events and neurological change). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01151124.Findings: 13 men were recruited between September, 2010, and January, 2013, of whom 11 (mean age 69 years, range 60-82) received CTX-DP. Median NIHSS score before implantation was 7 (IQR 6-8) and the mean time from stroke was 29 (SD 14) months. Three men had subcortical infarcts only and seven had right-hemisphere infarcts. No immunological or cell-related adverse events were seen. Other adverse events were related to the procedure or comorbidities. Hyperintensity around the injection tracts on T2-weighted fluid-attenuation inversion recovery MRI was seen in five patients. At 2 years, improvement in NIHSS score ranged from 0 to 5 (median 2) points.Interpretation: Single intracerebral doses of CTX-DP up to 20 million cells induced no adverse events and were associated with improved neurological function. Our observations support further investigation of CTX-DP in stroke patients.Funding: ReNeuron Limited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: New treatment options are needed for patients with multiple myeloma that is refractory to proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs. We assessed daratumumab, a novel CD38-targeted monoclonal antibody, in patients with refractory multiple myeloma.Methods: In this open-label, multicentre, phase 2 trial done in Canada, Spain, and the USA, patients (age ≥18 years) with multiple myeloma who were previously treated with at least three lines of therapy (including proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs), or were refractory to both proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs, were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive intravenous daratumumab 8 mg/kg or 16 mg/kg in part 1 stage 1 of the study, to decide the dose for further assessment in part 2. Patients received 8 mg/kg every 4 weeks, or 16 mg/kg per week for 8 weeks (cycles 1 and 2), then every 2 weeks for 16 weeks (cycles 3-6), and then every 4 weeks thereafter (cycle 7 and higher). The allocation schedule was computer-generated and randomisation, with permuted blocks, was done centrally with an interactive web response system. In part 1 stage 2 and part 2, patients received 16 mg/kg dosed as in part 1 stage 1. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (partial response [PR] + very good PR + complete response [CR] + stringent CR). All patients who received at least one dose of daratumumab were included in the analysis. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01985126.Findings: The study is ongoing. In part 1 stage 1 of the study, 18 patients were randomly allocated to the 8 mg/kg group and 16 to the 16 mg/kg group. Findings are reported for the 106 patients who received daratumumab 16 mg/kg in parts 1 and 2. Patients received a median of five previous lines of therapy (range 2-14). 85 (80%) patients had previously received autologous stem cell transplantation, 101 (95%) were refractory to the most recent proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs used, and 103 (97%) were refractory to the last line of therapy. Overall responses were noted in 31 patients (29.2%, 95% CI 20.8-38.9)-three (2.8%, 0.6-8.0) had a stringent CR, ten (9.4%, 4.6-16.7) had a very good PR, and 18 (17.0%, 10.4-25.5) had a PR. The median time to first response was 1.0 month (range 0.9-5.6). Median duration of response was 7.4 months (95% CI 5.5-not estimable) and progression-free survival was 3.7 months (95% CI 2.8-4.6). The 12-month overall survival was 64.8% (95% CI 51.2-75.5) and, at a subsequent cutoff, median overall survival was 17.5 months (95% CI 13.7-not estimable). Daratumumab was well tolerated; fatigue (42 [40%] patients) and anaemia (35 [33%]) of any grade were the most common adverse events. No drug-related adverse events led to treatment discontinuation.Interpretation: Daratumumab monotherapy showed encouraging efficacy in heavily pretreated and refractory patients with multiple myeloma, with a favourable safety profile in this population of patients.Funding: Janssen Research & Development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Isavuconazole is a novel triazole with broad-spectrum antifungal activity. The SECURE trial assessed efficacy and safety of isavuconazole versus voriconazole in patients with invasive mould disease.Methods: This was a phase 3, double-blind, global multicentre, comparative-group study. Patients with suspected invasive mould disease were randomised in a 1:1 ratio using an interactive voice-web response system, stratified by geographical region, allogeneic haemopoietic stem cell transplantation, and active malignant disease at baseline, to receive isavuconazonium sulfate 372 mg (prodrug; equivalent to 200 mg isavuconazole; intravenously three times a day on days 1 and 2, then either intravenously or orally once daily) or voriconazole (6 mg/kg intravenously twice daily on day 1, 4 mg/kg intravenously twice daily on day 2, then intravenously 4 mg/kg twice daily or orally 200 mg twice daily from day 3 onwards). We tested non-inferiority of the primary efficacy endpoint of all-cause mortality from first dose of study drug to day 42 in patients who received at least one dose of the study drug (intention-to-treat [ITT] population) using a 10% non-inferiority margin. Safety was assessed in patients who received the first dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00412893.Findings: 527 adult patients were randomly assigned (258 received study medication per group) between March 7, 2007, and March 28, 2013. All-cause mortality from first dose of study drug to day 42 for the ITT population was 19% with isavuconazole (48 patients) and 20% with voriconazole (52 patients), with an adjusted treatment difference of -1·0% (95% CI -7·8 to 5·7). Because the upper bound of the 95% CI (5·7%) did not exceed 10%, non-inferiority was shown. Most patients (247 [96%] receiving isavuconazole and 255 [98%] receiving voriconazole) had treatment-emergent adverse events (p=0·122); the most common were gastrointestinal disorders (174 [68%] vs 180 [69%]) and infections and infestations (152 [59%] vs 158 [61%]). Proportions of patients with treatment-emergent adverse events by system organ class were similar overall. However, isavuconazole-treated patients had a lower frequency of hepatobiliary disorders (23 [9%] vs 42 [16%]; p=0·016), eye disorders (39 [15%] vs 69 [27%]; p=0·002), and skin or subcutaneous tissue disorders (86 [33%] vs 110 [42%]; p=0·037). Drug-related adverse events were reported in 109 (42%) patients receiving isavuconazole and 155 (60%) receiving voriconazole (p<0·001).Interpretation: Isavuconazole was non-inferior to voriconazole for the primary treatment of suspected invasive mould disease. Isavuconazole was well tolerated compared with voriconazole, with fewer study-drug-related adverse events. Our results support the use of isavuconazole for the primary treatment of patients with invasive mould disease.Funding: Astellas Pharma Global Development, Basilea Pharmaceutica International. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]