Search

Background As recommended in the current prescribing information, rituximab infusions in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) take 4.25 hours for the first infusion and 3.25 hours for subsequent infusions, which is a burden on patients and the health care system. We therefore evaluated the safety of infusing rituximab at a faster rate for an infusion period of 2 hours in patients with RA. Methods Patients with an inadequate response to anti-TNF who were rituximab-naive or -experienced received 2 courses of rituximab: Infusion 1 (Day 1) was administered over the standard 4.25 hours, and Infusions 2 (Day 15), 3 (Day 168) and 4 (Day 182) were administered over a faster 2-hour period. The primary endpoint was incidence of infusion-related reactions (IRRs) associated with Infusion 2. Results Of the 351 patients enrolled, 87% and 13% were rituximab-naive and -experienced, respectively. The incidence (95% CI) of IRRs associated with Infusion 1 was 16.2% (12.5%, 20.5%) and consistent with weighted historical incidence of 20.7% (19.4%, 22.1%). The incidence (95% CI) of IRRs associated with Infusions 2, 3, and 4 compared with respective weighted historical incidences at the standard infusion rate was 6.5% (4.1%, 9.7%) vs 8.1% (7.2%, 9.1%); 5.9% (3.5%, 9.3%) vs 11.5% (10.3%, 12.8%); and 0.7 (0.1%, 2.6%) vs 5.0% (4.2%, 6.0%), respectively. All IRRs were grade 1 or 2, except for 3 grade 3 IRRs associated with Infusion 1 and 2 grade 3 IRRs associated with Infusion 2. Four patients experienced a total of 5 grade 3 IRRs; 3 of these patients continued on to received subsequent infusions at the faster rate. There were no serious IRRs. Conclusion This study demonstrated that rituximab can be administered at the faster infusion rate at the second and subsequent infusions without increasing the rate or severity of IRRs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: A 2-year multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study examined the efficacy and safety of different doses of 17beta-estradiol (E(2)) alone and continuous-combined oral formulations of E(2) and norethindrone acetate (NETA) versus placebo in the prevention of bone loss in newly menopausal women., Design: Patients were randomized to one of seven groups: placebo, E(2) 0.25 mg, E2 0.5 mg, E(2) 1 mg, E(2) 1 mg/NETA 0.25 mg, E(2) 1 mg/NETA 0.5 mg, or E(2) 2 mg/NETA 1 mg. Treatment was a once-daily tablet taken for 26 months. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change in bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine, measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, at screening and at 13, 19, and 26 months. BMD changes at the femoral neck and trochanter were also assessed. Biochemical markers of bone metabolism were measured at baseline, and at 3, 6, 13, 19, and 26 months. Histological diagnoses of endometrial samples were tabulated for each treatment group., Results: A total of 327 women were randomized and 189 women completed the 2-year trial. BMD at the lumbar spine decreased 2.3% in the placebo group. The lowest dose of unopposed E(2) prevented bone loss at the spine and hip. Significant increases in spine BMD compared with placebo occurred in all groups of treatment with E(2) and were more pronounced in the combination groups. Compared with placebo, women receiving active treatment experienced greater reductions in bone resorption markers. The effects were evident by 6 months and generally remained stable thereafter. Adverse events, primarily associated with the endometrium, were the most common reasons for discontinuation., Conclusions: There is a dose-dependent effect of E(2) on BMD. The addition of NETA seems to enhance the response in BMD observed with E(2). Low doses of E(2) (1 mg and lower) can be considered for the prevention of osteoporosis, while titrating the hormone dose to individual patient's needs.