Search

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to assess the long-term safety of linezolid in patients with chronic infections requiring treatment for ≥6 weeks. Enhanced monitoring for optic neuropathy was included to characterize the early development of this side effect and to identify ophthalmologic tests that might be valuable in early detection of this event.MethodsThis was a multicenter, open-label, pilot study of patients aged ≥18 years on long-term linezolid therapy. Matched control patients were included for baseline assessment comparison. Patients were assessed at study entry, monthly while on treatment, at the end of treatment, and 30 days following the last dose. Aggregate ocular safety data were reviewed. Response to treatment was reported.ResultsThe study was terminated owing to slow enrollment. Twenty-four patients received linezolid; nine patients were included as matched controls. Linezolid was prescribed for a median of 80.5 days (range, 50-254 days). In patients with a reported clinical outcome, the majority were considered improved or cured. Common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) included anemia, peripheral neuropathy, polyneuropathy, vomiting, and asthenia, and were consistent with the known safety profile. Most AEs resolved or stabilized with discontinuation of treatment. Results of ophthalmologic tests in the one case adjudicated as probable linezolid-associated optic neuropathy revealed abnormal color vision, characteristic changes in the optic disk, and central scotomas in each eye.ConclusionIn our small population, linezolid was generally well tolerated and AEs were consistent with the known safety profile. Extensive ophthalmologic testing of all 24 linezolid-treated patients identified one case adjudicated as probable, linezolid-associated optic neuropathy.

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to assess the long-term safety of linezolid in patients with chronic infections requiring treatment for ≥6 weeks. Enhanced monitoring for optic neuropathy was included to characterize the early development of this side effect and to identify ophthalmologic tests that might be valuable in early detection of this event.MethodsThis was a multicenter, open-label, pilot study of patients aged ≥18 years on long-term linezolid therapy. Matched control patients were included for baseline assessment comparison. Patients were assessed at study entry, monthly while on treatment, at the end of treatment, and 30 days following the last dose. Aggregate ocular safety data were reviewed. Response to treatment was reported.ResultsThe study was terminated owing to slow enrollment. Twenty-four patients received linezolid; nine patients were included as matched controls. Linezolid was prescribed for a median of 80.5 days (range, 50-254 days). In patients with a reported clinical outcome, the majority were considered improved or cured. Common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) included anemia, peripheral neuropathy, polyneuropathy, vomiting, and asthenia, and were consistent with the known safety profile. Most AEs resolved or stabilized with discontinuation of treatment. Results of ophthalmologic tests in the one case adjudicated as probable linezolid-associated optic neuropathy revealed abnormal color vision, characteristic changes in the optic disk, and central scotomas in each eye.ConclusionIn our small population, linezolid was generally well tolerated and AEs were consistent with the known safety profile. Extensive ophthalmologic testing of all 24 linezolid-treated patients identified one case adjudicated as probable, linezolid-associated optic neuropathy.

Background: Skin pain in atopic dermatitis (AD) increases with disease severity and is associated with substantial quality of life (QoL) burden. Objectives: The aim of the study was to evaluate abrocitinib efficacy on skin pain and QoL in adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD. Methods: This post hoc analysis included data with abrocitinib administered as monotherapy (pooled phase 2b [NCT02780167] and phase 3 JADE MONO-1 [NCT03349060] and JADE MONO-2 [NCT03575871]) or in combination with topical therapy (phase 3 JADE COMPARE [NCT03720470] and JADE TEEN [NCT03796676]). Patients received oral, once-daily abrocitinib 200 mg, abrocitinib 100 mg, or placebo for 12 or 16 weeks (JADE COMPARE). Skin pain was rated using the Pruritus and Symptoms Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis (PSAAD) skin pain Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) item ("How painful was your skin over the past 24 h?") on a scale from 0 (not painful) to 10 (extremely painful). Itch (Peak Pruritus NRS) and QoL (Dermatology Life Quality Index or Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index) were assessed. Least squares mean (LSM) change from baseline was analyzed using mixed-effects repeated measures modeling. Results: A total of 1,822 patients (monotherapy pool, n = 942; JADE COMPARE, n = 595; and JADE TEEN, n = 285) were analyzed. LSM change from baseline in PSAAD skin pain score was significantly greater with abrocitinib versus placebo from week 2 through week 12 or 16 across all 3 study populations and occurred in a dose-dependent manner. A greater proportion of patients achieved a ≥4-point improvement from baseline in PSAAD skin pain score with abrocitinib (200 mg and 100 mg) versus placebo in the monotherapy pool (56% and 38% vs. 12%; week 12), JADE COMPARE (72% and 52% vs. 26%; week 16), and JADE TEEN (51% and 60% vs. 31%; week 12). Additionally, a greater proportion of patients achieved a stringent threshold of skin pain improvement (PSAAD skin pain score <2) with abrocitinib versus placebo. Adults and adolescents who achieved a ≥4-point improvement in skin pain reported greater QoL improvement than those who did not achieve a ≥4-point improvement. A positive correlation (≥0.3) was observed between skin pain and QoL and separately between skin pain and itch across the 3 study populations. Conclusion: Abrocitinib as monotherapy or in combination with topical therapy improved skin pain and was associated with improved QoL in both adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD across all evaluated studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Abrocitinib efficacy by comorbidity status in patients with moderate‐to‐severe atopic dermatitis (AD) has not been previously assessed. This post hoc analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of abrocitinib in patients with AD and allergic comorbidities. Methods: Data were pooled from patients who received abrocitinib 200 mg, 100 mg, or placebo in phase 2b (NCT02780167) and phase 3 (NCT03349060, NCT03575871) monotherapy trials. Patients with and without allergic comorbidities (allergic asthma, rhinitis, conjunctivitis, or food allergy) were evaluated for Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) response (clear [0] or almost clear [1]), ≥75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI‐75), ≥4‐point improvement in Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP‐NRS4), and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) response (<2 with baseline score ≥2). Other outcomes were Patient‐Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM), SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD), Pruritus and Symptoms Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis (PSAAD), and treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Results: Of 942 patients, 498 (53%) reported at least one allergic comorbidity (asthma only, 33%; conjunctivitis only or rhinitis only or both, 17%; food allergies only, 15%; >1 allergic comorbidity, 34%). Regardless of comorbidity status, from Week 2 to Week 12, higher percentages of patients treated with either abrocitinib dose achieved IGA 0/1, EASI‐75, PP‐NRS4, or DLQI 0/1 versus placebo‐treated patients. Changes from baseline in POEM, SCORAD, and PSAAD were greater with abrocitinib than with placebo in patients with and without allergic comorbidities. Most TEAEs were mild or moderate. Conclusions: Efficacy and safety data support abrocitinib use to manage AD in patients with or without allergic comorbidities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]