Search

Background: Previous studies of fixed-dose radioiodine therapy (RIT) for Graves’ disease (GD) have utilized a variety of techniques and reported differing success rates. This study sought to compare the efficacy of RIT using two fixed-dose protocols and to estimate the optimal radioiodine (RAI) activity for the treatment of GD. Methods: This retrospective trial enrolled 658 patients with GD who received RIT between January 2014 and December 2021. Participants were divided into two groups: protocol 1, which utilized a thyroid size-specific RAI dose, and protocol 2, which employed a modified dose calculation approach. The primary outcome assessed was the presence of euthyroidism or hypothyroidism at the 6-month follow-up. The success rates of RIT were compared between the two protocols. Results: The RIT success rate was marginally lower for protocol 2 than for protocol 1 (63.6% vs. 67.2%); however, the risk of treatment failure did not differ considerably between the groups (relative risk, 1.1089; 95% confidence interval, 0.8937 to 1.3758; P=0.3477). The median RAI activity associated with protocol 2 was lower than that for protocol 1 (10.7 mCi vs. 15.0 mCi, P=0.0079), and the frequency of hypothyroidism was significantly lower in the protocol 2 group (39.0% vs. 48.9%, P=0.0117). Conclusion: The success rate of the modified dose calculation protocol was comparable to that of the thyroid size-specific RAI dose protocol. The former approach reduced RAI activity and the incidence of hypothyroidism following RIT without compromising the success rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Prolgolimab is the first Russian PD-1 inhibitor approved for the first-line treatment of unresectable or metastatic melanoma and advanced non-small cell lung cancer. It was approved in two weight-based regimens of 1 mg/kg Q2W and 3 mg/kg Q3W, but because of re-evaluation of weight-based dosing paradigm, studying of a fixed-dose regimen was considered perspective. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, single-arm, open-label efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and safety study to obtain data that would allow the approval of the new flat dosing regimen of prolgolimab in patients with previously untreated unresectable or metastatic melanoma (BCD-100-8/FLAT, NCT05783882). The primary objective was to prove the non-inferiority of prolgolimab 250 mg Q3W versus prolgolimab 1 mg/kg Q2W for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma in terms of ORR according to RECIST 1.1. Patients from the MIRACULUM study (BCD-100-2/MIRACULUM, NCT03269565) comprised a historical control group. Results: One hundred fourteen patients received prolgolimab 250 mg Q3W, and 61 patients received prolgolimab (Prolgo) 1 mg/kg Q2W (historical control). Objective response was achieved by 33.3% [95% confidence interval (CI): 24.8, 42.8] of patients in the Prolgo 250 mg group compared with 32.8% (95% CI: 21.3, 46.0) of patients in the Prolgo 1 mg/kg group. Risk difference was 0.00, 95% CI (-0.12; NA), p = 0.0082. Both regimens were well tolerated, and safety profiles were comparable. The pharmacokinetic analysis (PK) showed that the regimen with the fixed dose of 250 mg Q3W was characterized by higher PK parameters. The immunogenicity study did not detect binding antibodies to prolgolimab in any of the subjects. Conclusion: The obtained results showed that the selected fixed dosing regimen of prolgolimab 250 mg Q3W is characterized by efficacy and safety parameters comparable to that observed for the 1 mg/kg Q2W regimen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Daptomycin is a high‐use intravenous antimicrobial agent affording the convenience of once‐daily dosing. Prior studies suggest an opportunity to use a more operationally convenient fixed rather than weight‐based dosing but this approach has not been studied prospectively. Methods: This study quantified the probability of toxicity and efficacy end points by prospectively testing a fixed dose regimen of daptomycin (750 mg) in obese and non‐obese adults. At least, three daptomycin concentrations were measured at steady‐state for each patient. A population pharmacokinetic model was constructed to evaluate concentration‐time profiles and investigate covariates of daptomycin clearance. Simulations were performed to evaluate the probability of achieving efficacy (24‐h area under the curve (AUC0‐24) ≥ 666 mg∙h/L) and toxicity (minimum concentration (Cmin) ≥24.3 mg/L) targets for fixed (500–1000 mg) and weight‐based (6–12 mg/kg) daptomycin doses. Results: Thirty‐one patients (16 females, 15 males) with median (interquartile range (IQR)) age of 50 (30, 62) years and weight of 74 (54, 156) kg were included in the final analysis. Fixed dose daptomycin (750 mg) resulted in similar exposure across weights with a median (IQR) AUC0‐24 of 819 (499, 1501) mg∙h/L and 749 (606, 1265) mg∙h/L in patients weighing ≤74 kg and >74 kg, respectively. Overall, male sex and increased kidney function necessitate higher fixed and weight‐based doses to achieve efficacy. Creatine phosphokinase elevation was observed in two patients (6.5%) and predicted to be lower with fixed versus weight‐based regimens. Conclusions: Fixed daptomycin dosing adjusted for sex and kidney function is expected to improve the efficacy‐to‐toxicity ratio, transitions of care, and costs compared to weight‐based doses. However, no empiric dosing approach is predicted to achieve ≥90% efficacy while minimizing the risk of toxicity, so therapeutic drug monitoring should be considered on a patient‐specific basis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundProlgolimab is the first Russian PD-1 inhibitor approved for the first-line treatment of unresectable or metastatic melanoma and advanced non-small cell lung cancer. It was approved in two weight-based regimens of 1 mg/kg Q2W and 3 mg/kg Q3W, but because of re-evaluation of weight-based dosing paradigm, studying of a fixed-dose regimen was considered perspective.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, single-arm, open-label efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and safety study to obtain data that would allow the approval of the new flat dosing regimen of prolgolimab in patients with previously untreated unresectable or metastatic melanoma (BCD-100-8/FLAT, NCT05783882). The primary objective was to prove the non-inferiority of prolgolimab 250 mg Q3W versus prolgolimab 1 mg/kg Q2W for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma in terms of ORR according to RECIST 1.1. Patients from the MIRACULUM study (BCD-100-2/MIRACULUM, NCT03269565) comprised a historical control group.ResultsOne hundred fourteen patients received prolgolimab 250 mg Q3W, and 61 patients received prolgolimab (Prolgo) 1 mg/kg Q2W (historical control). Objective response was achieved by 33.3% [95% confidence interval (CI): 24.8, 42.8] of patients in the Prolgo 250 mg group compared with 32.8% (95% CI: 21.3, 46.0) of patients in the Prolgo 1 mg/kg group. Risk difference was 0.00, 95% CI (−0.12; NA), p = 0.0082. Both regimens were well tolerated, and safety profiles were comparable. The pharmacokinetic analysis (PK) showed that the regimen with the fixed dose of 250 mg Q3W was characterized by higher PK parameters. The immunogenicity study did not detect binding antibodies to prolgolimab in any of the subjects.ConclusionThe obtained results showed that the selected fixed dosing regimen of prolgolimab 250 mg Q3W is characterized by efficacy and safety parameters comparable to that observed for the 1 mg/kg Q2W regimen.

Abstract Background For the topical treatment of plaque psoriasis, vitamin D analogues and corticosteroids are used as a fixed combination, which is available in different galenic preparations. Objectives The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness and tolerability of calcipotriol/betamethasone (Cal/BD) cutaneous foam in a real‐world setting. Methods Overall, 107 adult patients with at least mild plaque psoriasis as measured by the Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) were included and treated for 4 weeks. Affected body surface area (BSA), plaque locations, and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) were documented at baseline, after 4 weeks and at the end of the study. Pruritus, overall patient satisfaction, tolerability and convenience of use, as well as quality of life (DLQI) were also evaluated. Results In total, 96% of the patients suffered from mild to moderate psoriasis vulgaris. Of all patients included, 76% had previously received topical therapy. Under treatment with Cal/BD aerosol foam, the mean IGA score was reduced from 2.49 to 1.28 points (p

Two recent large trials showed the potential of single pill combinations (SPCs) with ≥3 low-dose components among people with hypertension who were untreated or receiving monotherapy. In both trials, these ‘hypertension polypills’ were superior to usual care, achieving >80% BP control without increasing withdrawal due to side effects. However, there are no such products available for prescribers. To address this unmet need, George Medicines developed GMRx2 with telmisartan/amlodipine/indapamide in three strengths (mg): 10/1.25/0.625, 20/2.5/1.25; 40/5/2.5. Two pivotal trials are ongoing to support FDA submission for the treatment of hypertension, including initial treatment. These assess efficacy and safety of GMRx2 compared to: placebo, and each of the three possible dual combinations. Regulatory submissions are planned for 2024, with the aim of providing access to GMRx2 in developed and developing regions. Wider implementation of GMRx2-based treatment strategies will be guided by further research to inform access and appropriate scale up.

Aims: To assess the appropriateness of the body weight or fixed dosing regimen, a population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) model of kukoamine B has been built in sepsis patients. Methods: Plasma concentrations of kukoamine B and the covariates information were taken from 30 sepsis patients assigned into 0.06 mg/kg, 0.12 mg/kg and 0.24 mg/kg groups in a Phase IIa clinical trial. The PopPK model was built using a nonlinear mixed‐effect (NLME) modelling approach. Based on the final model, PK profiles were respectively simulated 500 times applying the body weight and renal function information of 12 sepsis patients from the 0.24 mg/kg group on the body weight or the fixed dosing regimen. For each dosing regimen, PK profiles of 6000 virtual patients were obtained. Statistical analyses for Cmax and Cmin were performed. If the biases of Cmax and Cmin can all meet the criteria of ±15%, the fixed dosing regimen can substitute for the body weight dosing regimen. Results: The PopPK model was successfully developed using the NLME approach. A bi‐compartmental model was selected as the basic model. Renal function was identified as a statistically significant covariate of systemic clearance with the objective function value (OFV) decreasing 8.6, resulting in a 5.2% decrease in inter‐individual variability (IIV) of systemic clearance. Body weight was not identified as a statistically significant covariate. Simulation results demonstrated two methods had a bias of 8.1% for Cmax, and 8.6% for Cmin. Furthermore, PK variability was lower on the fixed dosing regimen than the body weight regimen. Conclusions: Based on the simulation results, a fixed dosing regimen was recommended in the subsequent clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Backgruound: Previous studies of fixed-dose radioiodine therapy (RIT) for Graves' disease (GD) have utilized a variety of techniques and reported differing success rates. This study sought to compare the efficacy of RIT using two fixed-dose protocols and to estimate the optimal radioiodine (RAI) activity for the treatment of GD., Methods: This retrospective trial enrolled 658 patients with GD who received RIT between January 2014 and December 2021. Participants were divided into two groups: protocol 1, which utilized a thyroid size-specific RAI dose, and protocol 2, which employed a modified dose calculation approach. The primary outcome assessed was the presence of euthyroidism or hypothyroidism at the 6-month follow-up. The success rates of RIT were compared between the two protocols., Results: The RIT success rate was marginally lower for protocol 2 than for protocol 1 (63.6% vs. 67.2%); however, the risk of treatment failure did not differ considerably between the groups (relative risk, 1.1089; 95% confidence interval, 0.8937 to 1.3758; P=0.3477). The median RAI activity associated with protocol 2 was lower than that for protocol 1 (10.7 mCi vs. 15.0 mCi, P=0.0079), and the frequency of hypothyroidism was significantly lower in the protocol 2 group (39.0% vs. 48.9%, P=0.0117)., Conclusion: The success rate of the modified dose calculation protocol was comparable to that of the thyroid size-specific RAI dose protocol. The former approach reduced RAI activity and the incidence of hypothyroidism following RIT without compromising the success rate.

Background: In the phase 2 EMPOWER-CSCC-1 study (NCT02760498), cemiplimab demonstrated antitumor activity against metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (mCSCC) and locally advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (laCSCC)., Objectives: To report final analysis of weight-based cemiplimab in mCSCC and laCSCC (groups 1 and 2), fixed-dose cemiplimab in mCSCC (group 3), and primary analysis of fixed-dose cemiplimab in mCSCC/laCSCC (group 6)., Methods: Patients received cemiplimab (3 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks [groups 1 and 2]) or cemiplimab (350 mg intravenously [groups 3 and 6]) every 3 weeks. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR). Duration of response (DOR) and progression-free survival (PFS) are presented per protocol, according to post-hoc sensitivity analyses that only include the period of protocol-mandated imaging assessments., Results: At 42.5 months, ORR for groups 1-3 (n = 193) was 47.2%, estimated 12-month DOR was 88.3%, and median PFS was 26.0 months. At 8.7 months, ORR for group 6 (n = 165 patients) was 44.8%; median DOR and median PFS were not reached. Serious treatment-emergent adverse event rates (grade ≥3) were groups 1-3: 31.1% and group 6: 34.5%., Limitations: Nonrandomized study, nonsurvival primary end point., Conclusion: EMPOWER-CSCC-1 provides the largest prospective data on long-term efficacy and safety for anti-programmed cell death-1 therapy in advanced CSCC., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest Dr Hughes reports consulting/advisory roles at AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, and Roche; and institutional research funding from Amgen. Dr Guminski reports personal fees and advisory board and travel support from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Sun Pharma; advisory board fees from Eisai, Merck KGaA, and Pfizer; travel support from Astellas; and clinical trial unit support from PPD Australia. Dr Bowyer reports advisory board roles for Eli Lilly Australia, Ipsen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Sanofi; virtual meeting sponsorship from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Merck Sharp & Dohme Australia; and travel support from Merck Sharp & Dohme and AstraZeneca. Michael Migden reports honoraria and travel expenses from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Sanofi; consulting fees from Feldan Therapeutics, Replimune, Stamford Pharma, and Sun Pharma; and institutional research funding from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Replimune. Dr Schmults reports steering committee membership for Castle Biosciences; steering committee membership and consultancy for Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; consultancy for Sanofi; research funding from Castle Biosciences, Genentech, Merck, Novartis, and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; and serving as a chair for the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Dr Khushalani reports grants and advisory board fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Novartis, and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; advisory board fees from AstraZeneca (data safety monitoring committee), Castle Biosciences, Incyte (data safety monitoring committee), Instil Bio, Iovance, Jounce Therapeutics, Nektar, and Replimune; grants from Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, HUYA, Modulation Therapeutics, and Replimune; honoraria from Genzyme, National Comprehensive Cancer Network (grant funding from general research support through Pfizer), and Nektar (study steering committee); common stock ownership of Amarin, Bellicum Pharmaceuticals, and Transenetrix; study steering committee membership for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Replimune; and travel support from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Dr Chang reports consulting and advisory roles with Merck, and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; research funding from Galderma, Merck, Novartis, and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and consultancy for Castle Biosciences and Feldan. Dr Grob reports serving on an advisory board for Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pierre-Fabre, Pfizer, Philogen, Roche, and Sanofi; and an advisory role for Bristol-Myers Squibb. Dr Lewis reports employment, stock, and other ownership interests at Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. At the time of this study, Dr Lewis was affiliated with the University of Colorado Denver Cancer Center and is now an employee of Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Dr Day reports serving on an advisory board for Amgen, travel support from Merck; and clinical trial support (investigational medical product provision, no financial support) from AstraZeneca and Bristol-Myers Squibb. Dr Ladwa reports honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Merck Sharp & Dohme; consulting or advisory roles for AstraZeneca, and Roche; and travel, accommodation, and expenses from Merck Sharp & Dohme. Dr Stein reports ownership of stocks/shares in Icon Group. Dr Muñoz Couselo reports serving on an advisory board for Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Roche, and Sanofi; honoraria from Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, and Roche; and clinical trial participation (principal investigator) for Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Roche, and Sanofi. Dr Meier reports travel support, speaker’s fees, or advisor’s honoraria from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Roche, and Sanofi; and research funding from Novartis and Roche. Dr Hauschild reports institutional grants, speaker’s honoraria, and consultancy fees from Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pierre Fabre, Provectus, Roche, and Novartis; institutional grants and consultancy fees from Merck Serono, Philogen, and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; and consultancy fees from OncoSec. Dr Schadendorf reports honoraria from 4SC AG, Array BioPharma, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Immunocore, InflarxGmbH, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme, NeraCare GmbH, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Pfizer, Philogen, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sandoz, Sanofi, Serono, Sun Pharma, Roche/Genentech, and Ultimovacs; advisory board and consulting fees from 4SC AG, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Roche/Genentech, Sanofi, and Nektar; speaker fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck KGaA, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Sanofi; institutional research funding from Array BioPharma/Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, and Roche; and travel/accommodation expenses from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Roche/Genentech, and Sanofi. Dr Basset-Seguin reports serving as an invited speaker, advisory board member, and consultant for Galderma, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sanofi, and Sun Pharma. Dr Modi reports consulting/advisory board participation for Merck, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Sanofi Genzyme; and speaker bureau participation for Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Sanofi Genzyme. Dr Dalac-Rat reports honoraria from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, and Sun Pharma. Dr Dunn reports advisory board participation for Merck and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; and research support from CUE-101, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Replimune Pharmaceuticals, and Seagen. Dr Flatz reports research funding from Hookipa Pharma; and advisory board fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Philogen, and Sanofi. Dr Mortier reports personal fees and nonfinancial support from Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, and Roche. Dr Guégan reports consulting fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, and Pierre Fabre; and technical support for congress attendance from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Sanofi. Dr Heinzerling reports consulting fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Highlight Therapeutics, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Roche, and Sanofi; lecture fees from Astellas, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi; and travel grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Ipsen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, and Roche. Dr Mehnert reports advisory board fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, Novartis, Pliant Therapeutics, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Seagen; and consultancy fees from Merck. Dr Soria-Rivas reports speaker’s honoraria from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Immunocore, Merck Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Roche Pharma, and Sanofi Aventis; and advisory board fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Immunocore, Merck Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Sanofi Aventis. Dr Stratigos reports advisory board or steering committee roles for Janssen, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Roche, and Sanofi; and research support from AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genesis Pharma, LEO Pharma, Novartis, and Pfizer. Dr Ulrich reports advisory board and speaker roles for Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Roche, Sanofi, and Sun Pharma. Dr Wong reports grant funding to institution from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, F-Star Therapeutics, Genentech, Gilead, Kura Oncology, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and TopAlliance Biosciences, and consulting fees from Blueprint Medicines Corporation, Genzyme/Sanofi, and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Dr Beylot-Barry reports institutional research funding from Roche and speaker honoraria from Sun Pharma. Dr Bossi reports advisory board or conference honoraria for Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Sanofi-Regeneron, and Sun Pharma. Dr Bugés Sánchez reports personal fees from Amgen, Merck, Novartis, and Sanofi. Dr Chandra reports honoraria from Array BioPharma, Bristol-Myers Squibb, EMD Serono, Exicure, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Sanofi; consulting/advisory roles for Array BioPharma, Bristol-Myers Squibb, EMD Serono, Exicure, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Sanofi; and institutional research funding from Bristol-Myers Squibb, EMD Serono, Exicure, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Sanofi. Dr Robert reports grants, personal fees, and advisory board roles for Amgen, Biothera, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sanofi, and Ultimovacs. Dr Silk reports institutional research grant and funding from Biohaven Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Morphogenesis, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Replimune, and Shattuck Laboratories; advisory board fees from Natera, Merck and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; consulting fees from Leerink, and royalties from UpToDate, Inc. Ms Booth and Drs, Yoo, Seebach, Lowy, and Fury report employment, stock, and other ownership interests at Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Dr Rischin reports institutional research grant and funding from ALX Oncology, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Kura Oncology, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Roche, and Sanofi; and uncompensated scientific committee and advisory board roles for Eisai, Bicara, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Sanofi. Drs Ansstas, Trabelsi, and Russell have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Dermatology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: This study aimed to examine the safety of fixed‐dose nivolumab. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 113 Japanese patients with gastric cancer who were previously treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy and initiated nivolumab. The endpoints were the incidence of Grade 2 or higher immune‐related adverse events (irAEs) in the conventional dose (3 mg/kg) and fixed‐dose groups (240 mg). Results: The incidence rates of irAEs in the conventional‐dose and fixed‐dose groups were 29.9% and 19.4%, respectively, and the rates of Grade 2 or higher irAEs were 23.3% and 19.4%, respectively, with no significant difference between the two groups, suggesting that nivolumab at 240 mg is as safe as the 3 mg/kg dose. Conclusion: This is the first report on the safety of nivolumab at 240 mg in Japanese patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background and Aims This study aimed to examine the safety of fixed‐dose nivolumab. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 113 Japanese patients with gastric cancer who were previously treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy and initiated nivolumab. The endpoints were the incidence of Grade 2 or higher immune‐related adverse events (irAEs) in the conventional dose (3 mg/kg) and fixed‐dose groups (240 mg). Results The incidence rates of irAEs in the conventional‐dose and fixed‐dose groups were 29.9% and 19.4%, respectively, and the rates of Grade 2 or higher irAEs were 23.3% and 19.4%, respectively, with no significant difference between the two groups, suggesting that nivolumab at 240 mg is as safe as the 3 mg/kg dose. Conclusion This is the first report on the safety of nivolumab at 240 mg in Japanese patients.

Prior durvalumab (anti-PD-L1 agent) studies in platinum-refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma evaluated a dose of 10 mg/kg administered every two weeks. The nonrandomised phase 3b STRONG study (NCT03084471) evaluated the safety and efficacy of fixed-dose durvalumab at a more convenient dosing schedule in a previously treated patient population, more similar to a real-world clinical setting. 867 patients with urothelial or nonurothelial urinary tract carcinoma (UTC) who progressed on or after platinum or nonplatinum chemotherapy were treated with durvalumab 1500 mg every four weeks; 87% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0–1, and 13% had an ECOG PS of 2. The primary end-point was the incidence of adverse events of special interest (AESIs), including immune-mediated AEs (imAEs). Secondary and exploratory end-points included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (at six and 12 months) (DCR). AESIs of any grade were reported in 51% of patients (8% grade ≥ 3). The incidence of imAEs was 11% (2% grade ≥ 3). The median OS was 7.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.4–8.2) and ORR was 18% (95% CI: 14.8–20.6), with complete responses in 5% of patients and a DCR at six months of 19% (95% CI: 16.1–22.1). Fixed-dose durvalumab monotherapy every four weeks has an acceptable safety profile and yields durable clinical activity in previously chemotherapy-treated patients with UTC. Safety and efficacy are consistent with previous durvalumab studies and other anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agents in this setting. NCT03084471 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03084471. [Display omitted] • STRONG, a phase 3b study, had a large population similar to a real-world setting. • Patients had previously treated metastatic urothelial or nonurothelial carcinoma. • Patients received a fixed dose of durvalumab 1500 mg intravenously every four weeks. • The primary end-point was adverse events of special interest. • Durvalumab had an acceptable safety profile and durable clinical activity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of the study was to assess patient preference for the fixed-dose combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab for subcutaneous injection (PH FDC SC) in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer in PHranceSCa (NCT03674112). Patients who completed neoadjuvant P + H + chemotherapy + surgery were randomised 1:1 to three intravenous (IV) P + H cycles followed by three cycles of PH FDC SC or vice versa (crossover) and then chose subcutaneous (SC) injection or IV infusion to continue up to 18 cycles (continuation). Assessments were via patient and healthcare professional (HCP) questionnaires. One hundred and sixty patients were randomised (cut-off: 24 February 2020); 136 (85.0%, 95% confidence interval: 78.5–90.2%) preferred SC; 22 (13.8%) preferred IV; 2 (1.3%) had no preference. The main reasons for SC preference were reduced clinic time (n = 119) and comfort during administration (n = 73). One hundred and forty-one patients (88.1%) were very satisfied/satisfied with SC injection versus 108 (67.5%) with IV infusion; 86.9% chose PH FDC SC continuation. HCP perceptions of median patient treatment room time ranged from 33.0–50.0 min with SC and 130.0–300.0 min with IV. Most adverse events (AEs) were grade 1/2 (no 4/5s); serious AE rates were low. AE rates before and after switching were similar (cycles 1–3 IV → cycles 4–6 SC: 77.5% → 72.5%; cycles 1–3 SC → cycles 4–6 IV: 77.5% → 63.8%). Most patients strongly preferred PH FDC SC over P + H IV. PH FDC SC was generally well tolerated, with no new safety signals (even when switching), and offers a quicker alternative to IV infusion. [Display omitted] • PHranceSCa showed that most patients strongly preferred PH FDC SC over P + H IV. • PH FDC SC was generally well tolerated. • There were no new safety signals, even when switching. • PH FDC SC offers a quicker alternative to IV infusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Profound hypotension during cesarean section can compromise fetal circulation and cause cardiac arrest in the parturients. We compared the incidence of hypotension, adequacy of anesthesia, and neonatal outcome using a heightadjusted and weight-adjusted dose and a fixed dose of 0.5% intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine. Patients and methods This was a randomized controlled double-blind trial involving 80 parturients aged 18-40 years scheduled for elective cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. They were randomly allocated by blind balloting into one of two groups: group FD received 12mg of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine whereas group AD received a height-adjusted and weight-adjusted dose of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine according to Harten's chart. Parturients were preloaded with 10 ml/kg of 0.9% sodium chloride. Results The median dose of bupivacaine was significantly higher in group FD (12 mg) than group AD (9.5 mg) (P=0.001). The incidence of hypotension was significantly higher in group FD (60%) than in group AD (32.5%) (P=0.014). The median time to attain the maximal level of sensory block (T5) was significantly faster in group FD (10 min) than group AD (13 min) (P=0.021). The Apgar score and incidences of other complications were comparable between both groups (P>0.05). Conclusion It is concluded that a lower dose of bupivacaine was required to provide comparable sensory and motor block with less incidence of hypotension when the bupivacaine dose was adjusted to the height and weight of parturients than when a fixed dose was used. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pembrolizumab, an immune checkpoint inhibitor, indicated to treat multiple cancers, was initially approved in Australia as weight-based dosing at 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks (Q3W). Subsequent approvals used 'fixed' dosages of 200 mg Q3W or 400 mg every 6 weeks (Q6W). Pharmacokinetic equivalence was demonstrated between dosing strategies, with no significant differences in efficacy or toxicity. Fixed dosing regimens are routinely used in Australia., Aim: To model and compare the cost of weight-based dosing of pembrolizumab to standard fixed dosing regimens., Method: A single centre, retrospective review was conducted. Patients, identified from dispensing software, who commenced on pembrolizumab between January and December 2022 were included. Patient demographic and treatment data was extracted from electronic medical records. Costs of weight-based doses were calculated and compared to the cost of fixed dosing. Variables such as acquisition cost, funding mechanisms and 'vial sharing' were considered., Results: Fifty-two patients were included (63% male, median age 68 years). Of the 211 doses of pembrolizumab administered (average 4.1 doses/patient), 161 were Q3W doses, and 50 were Q6W doses. The acquisition cost for a fixed 200 mg and 400 mg dose was $7646, and $15,292, respectively. The average patient weight was 77.6 kg (SD 19 kg), which equated to $5933 for a weight-based Q3W dose, and $11,867 for the Q6W dose; a potential cost avoidance of $1965 and $3930 per dose, respectively. This represented a possible 23.5% avoidance in medication acquisition cost. Over the study period of 1 year, using weight-based dosing for pembrolizumab had the potential to reduce medication expenditure by $467,996., Discussion: Significant cost avoidance could be achieved via weight-based pembrolizumab dosing. Given the substantial total cost of pembrolizumab, the growing number of indications and the expected equivalent treatment outcomes with weight-based pembrolizumab, the potential cost reductions of weight-based pembrolizumab at both institution and government level should be further explored., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Background: Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4FPCC) is used for emergent warfarin reversal, but dosing remains controversial. Following approval, further studies have evaluated a variety of fixed-dose regimens. The studies utilized lower doses as compared with package insert dosing and provided data in regard to efficacy, safety, and cost savings. Further data are needed, however, to determine which fixed-dose regimen provides optimal efficacy and safety for emergent warfarin reversal.Objectives: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and cost-savings of a fixed-dose 4FPCC protocol.Methods: This multicentered, retrospective chart review of adult patients requiring 4FPCC for emergent warfarin reversal utilized a fixed-dose regimen of 1500 units. The 2 primary outcomes were the proportion of patients who achieved a post-4FPCC international normalized ratio (INR) of ≤1.5 and ≤2. Secondary outcomes included thrombotic events within 7 days of 4FPCC administration and survival to discharge. A cost analysis was also performed to identify potential cost savings.Results: Of the 64 patients included, 44 (68.8%) achieved a post-4FPCC INR ≤1.5, and 61 (95.3%) achieved a post-4FPCC INR ≤2.0. No thrombotic events were reported; 55 (85.9%) patients survived to hospital discharge. More than $1000 was saved per patient via utilization of the fixed-dose protocol.Conclusion and Relevance: A fixed-dose of 1500 units of 4FPCC successfully achieved a target INR of ≤1.5 in the majority of patients and resulted in no thrombotic events. This study adds to the data evaluating alternative 4FPCC dosing regimens in comparison to package insert recommended dosing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims & Objectives: The main aim of the present research work is to evaluate the pharmacokinetic parameters as well as therapeutic efficacy of Hydrochlorothiazide along with Losartan used as a fixed dose combined drug in treatment of hypertension. Methods: This study is carried out by utilizing a typical two periods; randomized & two way complete cross over design. All the volunteers are received fixed dose and single dose product based on the randomization code in each clinical period. Then blood samples are taken and the comperative Pharmacokinetic study was carried out. Matrix effect for internal standard (Letrozole and Candesartan) and analytes (Losartan, LCA & HTCZ) were also carried out as per US-FDA guideline. Results and Discussion: Maximum plasma concentration of fixed dose combining drug (in which Losartan combined with HCTZ) was found 49±8.87 ng/ml (Cmax) at time 2.75±0.25hrs (tmax) for HCTZ and the average maximum plasma concentration of 6 volunteers was 49.87 ng/ml & Tmax 2.75hrs, AUC0-t was 227.02 ng/ml at 48 hrs and AUC0-α227.67 ng/ml at infinite time & plasma half life (T1/2) of HCTZ 4.91hrs and Ket value is 0.14hr1. The matrix effect of internal standard (letrozole) ranged between 87.32% to 89.71% and for HCTZ it was between 88.47%-89.86%. And the matrix effect of internal standard (Candesartan) ranged between 93.77%-98.28% & same was found between 95.97%-96.78% in case of Losartan and for LCA it was 95.41%-98.39%. Conclusion: From the comperative pharmacokinetic study it can be concluded that after fixed dose combined drug treatment the maximum plasma concentration of losartan and losartan carboxylic acid were too much higher than the maximum concentration of losartan and LCA after single drug containing losartan only. And fixed dose combination drug is more susceptible than single dose of Losartan for the treatment of hypertension with better therapeutic efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dosing of four factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4PCC) for warfarin reversal remains controversial. Recently, the American College of Cardiology (ACC) recommended a low-dose PCC regimen as an option for warfarin reversal in acute major bleeding. We performed a retrospective study evaluating if a modified version of the ACC guideline recommendations was effective for warfarin reversal in acute major bleeds when compared to traditional variable dosing.Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients who received 4PCC for warfarin reversal in a 12 month period. We included patients that were ≥18 years of age, received 4PCC for warfarin reversal, and had an initial International Normalized Ratio (INR) of >2. Our primary outcome was the number of patients who had a post-4PCC infusion INR of <1.6.Results: A total of 60 patients were included in the final analysis with 30 patients stratified to the traditional dosing and low-dose groups, respectively. Patient demographics were similar between both groups. We found no difference in the number of patients who had a post-4PCC infusion INR <1.6 between the traditional dosing and low dosing group (90.0% vs. 86.7%; p = 0.68). Additionally, we found no difference between post-infusion median INRs in each group (1.35 vs. 1.30; p = 0.16). Approximately 1000 units per patient were spared when utilizing the low-dose regimen.Conclusion: A modified version of the ACC's low-dose 4PCC option for warfarin reversal achieves similar outcomes for lowering INR values compared to traditional variable dosing regimens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background:Daboia (Vipera) palaestinae envenomation (DPE) is the most common snake-bite in Israel. Current practice has supported antivenom treatment, including those with local or systemic manifestations. Objective: To evaluate a conservative approach vs. fixed dose D. palaestinae antivenom for patients with advance local (AL)/mild systemic (MS) manifestations. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 41 patients bitten by D. palaestinae who were treated with expectant management or administration of a fixed-dose of 50 mL antivenom. Results: Antivenom was withheld in 16/21 patients (76%) with AL or MS reaction. After expectant management, no adverse events were recorded. Conclusion: We found that a selective approach towards antivenom administration yields similar clinical outcomes in patients following DPE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Traditionally, most monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have been dosed based on body weight because of perceived contribution of body size in pharmacokinetic variability. The same approach was used in the initial pembrolizumab studies; however, following availability of PK data, the need for weight-based dosing for pembrolizumab was reassessed. Methods A previously established population PK (popPK) model as well as exposure-response results from patients with advanced melanoma or non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were used to evaluate the potential application of a fixed dosing regimen with the aim of maintaining pembrolizumab exposures within the range demonstrated to provide near maximal efficacy and acceptable safety. Individual PK exposures for the selected fixed dosing regimen from recently completed trials with head and neck cancer, NSCLC, microsatellite instability high (MSI-H) in colorectal cancer (CRC) and urothelial cancer were used to confirm acceptability. To determine whether fixed dosing would maintain exposures within the range of clinical experience, the individual AUC distributions with fixed dosing were compared with the range of exposures from the pembrolizumab doses that were evaluated in early studies (2 mg/kg Q3W, 10 mg/kg Q3W/Q2W). Results Body-weight dependence of clearance was characterized by a power relationship with an exponent of 0.578, a value consistent with fixed- and weight-based dosing providing similar control of PK variability. A fixed dose of 200 mg Q3W was investigated in trials based on predicted exposures maintained within the established exposure range in all patients. Mean (% CV, n) AUCss, 6-weeks was 1.87 (37%, 830), 1.38 (38%, 760) and 7.63 (35%, 1405) mg*day/mL in patients receiving 200 mg, 2 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg Q3W pembrolizumab. High-weight patients had the lowest exposures with 200 mg Q3W; however, exposures in this group (>90 kg) were within the range of prior clinical experience at 2 mg/kg Q3W associated with near maximal efficacy. Conclusions Doses of 200 mg and 2 mg/kg provide similar exposure distributions with no advantage to either dosing approach with respect to controlling PK variability. These findings suggest that weight-based and fixed-dose regimens are appropriate for pembrolizumab.

Radioactive iodine represents the significant therapeutic option in the treatment of benign thyroid disease. Despite a decades-long experience and a large number of treated patients, many issues related to the therapy with radioactive iodine are still under discussion, including the method of therapeutic dose determination and the factors that affect the therapy outcome. Clinical practice, as well as recommendations of the relevant guidelines in terms of the dosing of radioactive iodine, vary widely in the world: from the fixed dose application to the complex dosimetric protocols. A greater presence of dosimetric approach would facilitate the establishment of dose-effect correlation and the study of influence of various factors on the therapy outcome. Development of the new dosing protocols, as well as new insights into factors that affect therapeutic outcome, enable further improvement of both efficacy and safety of the radioactive iodine therapy for an individual patient.

Two recent large trials showed the potential of single pill combinations (SPCs) with ≥3 low-dose components among people with hypertension who were untreated or receiving monotherapy. In both trials, these 'hypertension polypills' were superior to usual care, achieving >80% BP control without increasing withdrawal due to side effects. However, there are no such products available for prescribers. To address this unmet need, George Medicines developed GMRx2 with telmisartan/amlodipine/indapamide in three strengths (mg): 10/1.25/0.625, 20/2.5/1.25; 40/5/2.5. Two pivotal trials are ongoing to support FDA submission for the treatment of hypertension, including initial treatment. These assess efficacy and safety of GMRx2 compared to: placebo, and each of the three possible dual combinations. Regulatory submissions are planned for 2024, with the aim of providing access to GMRx2 in developed and developing regions. Wider implementation of GMRx2-based treatment strategies will be guided by further research to inform access and appropriate scale up., Competing Interests: Authors Anthony Rodgers, Abdul Salam, Sonali Gnanenthiran and Aletta E Schutte are employed at TGI, which holds an interest in GMRx2 via its ownership of George Health Enterprises. None of the TGI staff have a personal financial interest in GM. Professor Rodgers is seconded part-time to GM. TGI holds patents for ultra-low-dose fixed-dose combination products for the treatment of hypertension and diabetes, and Professor Rodgers is listed as one of the inventors (Granted: US 10,369,15; US 10,799,487; US 10,322,117; US 11,033,544; US 11,478,462; Pending: US 17/932,982; US 18/446,268; US 17/598,122; US 17/317,614; US 17/527,084; US 17/527,085; US 17/527,087). Professor Rodgers does not have a financial interest in these patents. None of the other authors have a financial interest in GM or have received funding for their independent contribution to the GMRx2 program. Aletta E Schutte has received consulting fees and/or speaker honoraria from Omron Healthcare, Aktiia, Medtronic, Servier, Abbott, Sanofi, Sun Pharmaceuticals, Novartis. She is supported by a Fellowship of the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (ID 2017504). Dike B. Ojji has received speaker honoraria from Novartis, AstraZeneca, Servier, Swipha and Boehringer for speaking at educational meetings. Krzysztof Narkiewicz has received speaker and consulting honoraria from Bausch Health, Berlin-Chemie/Menarini, Egis, Idorsia, Gedeon Richter, Gilead, Krka, Novo Nordisk, Polpharma, Recordati, Sandoz and Servier. Markus Schlaich has received consulting fees, and/or travel and research support from Medtronic, Abbott, ReCor, Novartis, Servier, Pfizer, and Boehringer-Ingelheim. He is the current president of Hypertension Australia and Treasurer of the World Hypertension League., (Copyright: © 2024 The Author(s).)

Background Rasburicase is a recombinant urate oxidase enzyme used for the treatment and prevention of tumor lysis syndrome. Our objective was to assess the efficacy of indication-based, low-dose rasburicase administration compared to the Food and Drug Administration-approved weight-based dosing. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study utilizing data from a tertiary medical center including patients admitted from 2012 to 2016, who received at least one dose of rasburicase. The primary outcome was achieving a uric acid level less than 7.5 mg/dl after a single dose of rasburicase in the preprotocol (Food and Drug Administration-approved weight-based dosing) and postprotocol (indication-based, low-dose) groups. Secondary outcomes included the change in uric acid levels between the pre- and postprotocol groups, adherence to the new institutional protocol, need for repeat rasburicase doses, and a cost analysis. Results Sixty-four patients received at least one dose of rasburicase between 1 January 2012 and 1 December 2016. Twenty-seven (79.4%) doses in the preprotocol group and 28 (82.4%) doses in the postprotocol group successfully achieved a uric acid level less than 7.5 mg/dl after a single dose of rasburicase (p=1.000). The average total monthly cost of rasburicase was reduced by 59.9% after adoption of the new protocol. Conclusions Indication-based, low-dose rasburicase displayed significantly more value when compared to weight-based dosing as shown by achieving cost savings without compromising clinical efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Glaucoma therapy is typically started with a single drug that is considered most effective for IOP control and is relatively safe. Several classes of agents are available, including prostaglandin analogs (PGAs), β-blockers, carbonic anhydrase inhibitors (CAIs), cholinergic agonists, and α2-agonists. Most patients will require combined therapy to achieve predetermined target intraocular pressure (IOP), which can be difficult to sustain over time. Currently, maximum medical therapy (MMT) in glaucoma refers to ≤3 classes of medications combined to substantially lower IOP. MMT can be achieved using multiple single agents, double, or triple fixed-dose combinations. Areas covered: Several randomized controlled clinical trials demonstrated that 3-drug combination regimens are superior to 2-drug regimens for lowering 24-hour IOP, which may prevent glaucoma progression. However, long-term clinical evidence with 3- or 4-drug MMT regimens is scarce. Expert commentary: The next logical step in evolution of effective MMT may be the use of 4 classes of medications, adding triple fixed-combination to single agent or combining fixed-dose combinations of CAI plus α2-agonist and fixed-dose β-blocker plus PGA. Availability of novel fixed-dose combinations may optimize efficacy, tolerability, adherence, and improve long-term outcomes. Further controlled evidence is required to accurately delineate the value of current and future MMT regimens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2018, dosing regimens of the two most prescribed immune check point inhibitors (ICI), nivolumab (Opdivo®) and pembrolizumab (Keytruda®), in the treatment of lung cancer were changed from weight-based dosing to fixed dosing. The aim of this study was to compare the economic impact of this change in our university hospital group and then across Ile-de-France, the most inhabited French region. A budget impact analysis (BIA) has been performed on the French public health insurance data. The duration of treatment and the weight of the patients were calculated using data from the patients treated at our health facility and from clinical studies. The cost of treatment was calculated at the local level of our health facility and then for Ile-de-France. Our model demonstrates an additional cost of €550,115 in our hospital and €9,704,778 in Ile-de-France for a fixed dose prescription in 2018. In 2019, the BIA concluded an additional cost, according to the respective low and high assumptions, of €556,969 and €756,544 locally and € 10,201,027 to €14,486,141 for Ile-de-France for an equivalent efficacy between the two different drug dosing regimens of nivolumab and pembrolizumab. The adoption of the fixed dose regimen would lead, according to the least expensive hypothesis, to an additional cost of 26% for the ICI. These results encourage reflection on the strict adoption of this dosage modification. The option of maintaining the free choice between a prescription adapted to weight or in a fixed dose seems a relevant option and should be considered.

Background. Radioiodine therapy (RIT) is an alternative method to surgical treatment used in the treatment of hyperthyroidism (Graves’ disease or solitary/multinodular toxic goiter (STG/MTG) etiology). However, treatment protocol doesn’t exist. Aim. To evaluate the outcomes of the I131 treatment in hyperthyroidism using the standard dose (550 Mbq), and to explore the factors that influence the outcome of treatment. Methods. We studied 38 patients (35 women and 3 men) with hyperthyroidism. Each patient was carried I131 RIT in a dose of 550 Mbq. Patients were randomized 2 group – patients with Gravesapos; disease and patients with a solitary/multinodular toxic goiter. Antithyroid drugs withdraw was usually conducted for 7–14 days prior to RIT. Follow-up period ranged from 6 to 8 months, the average was 6.6 ± 0.4 months. Results. Six months after the RIT 23 patients (61%) reached hypothyroidism, 7 patients (18%) was observed euthyroidism, thyrotoxicosis stayed in 8 patients (21%). In patients with Gravesapos; disease onset hypothyroidism were more likely (75% vs 35.7%, p 0.001). Thus at STG/MTG achieve euthyrosis percentage was higher (28.6% vs 12.5%). Predictors of a positive outcome of the treatment are: less thyroid size (30 ml for women, 40 ml for men) and younger age (under 35 years old). Statistical significance in influencing the outcome of treatment by disease duration, level of stimulating antibodies against thyrotropin receptors have not been identified. Conclusions. Fixed activity of 550 MBq I131 has a different efficacy in the treatment of hyperthyroidism in patients with Graves’ disease and STG/MTG. In addition, on treatment results affect patient age and the size of the thyroid gland, which should be considered during planning RIT. In order to improve the effectiveness of radioiodine therapy of hyperthyroidism requires personalization tactics of treatment based on clinical factors, as well as the use of in vivo dosimetry planning when therapeutic activity calculating.

Background: Oral isotretinoin is highly effective in all forms and grades of acne, even in lower dosages (

The review deals with a new form of oral antidiabetic drugs with a fixed dose — the combination of sustained-release metformin and glimepiride. Amaryl®M SR (2/500 mg) — a new dosage form, which provides a rapid release of glimepiride, and then the slow release of metformin from multipolymer hydrophilic matrix independently of pH. Based on the research of therapeutic efficacy and bioavailability, it is shown that this form is characterized by an optimal pharmacokinetics of metformin and glimepiride, does not increase the incidence of hypoglycemia, may be administered once a day, and is associated with less severe gastrointestinal side effects, as well as has more pronounced compliance. Application of Amaryl®M SR creates new possibilities for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in terms of optimizing glycemic control and quality of life.

Antiretroviral (ART) therapy for the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection has undergone significant changes over the past 30 years. Many single‐tablet regimens (STRs), including newer fixed‐dose combination (FDC) tablets, are available, offering patients several options for choosing a treatment regimen that works best for them. Given these changes, patients are more likely to adhere to treatment, achieve better clinical outcomes, and experience both fewer side effects and drug‐drug interactions. Newer STRs include dolutegravir (DTG)/lamivudine (3TC)/abacavir (ABC) (Triumeq; Viiv Healthcare, Research Triangle Park, NC), rilpivirine (RPV)/emtricitabine (FTC)/tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) (Odefsey; Gilead, Foster City, CA), RPV/FTC/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) (Complera; Gilead), elvitegravir (EVG)/cobicistat (COBI)/FTC/TDF (Stribild; Gilead), and EVG/COBI/FTC/TAF (Genvoya; Gilead). Recently approved FDCs, such as atazanavir (ATV)/COBI (Evotaz; Bristol‐Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ), darunavir (DRV)/COBI (Prezcobix; Janssen Products, Titusville NJ), and FTC/TAF (Descovy; Gilead), are also now available. The Department of Health and Human Services treatment guidelines for HIV recommend many of these integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) STRs as a preferred choice for initiation of treatment in both ART‐naive and ‐experienced patients because they offer comparably faster rates of virologic suppression, reduced rates of resistance development (especially with DTG), and overall better adherence than protease inhibitors or NNRTIs. Numerous phase 3 clinical trials support these recommendations including several switch or simplification clinical trials. Notably, the novel pharmacokinetic booster COBI, with its water soluble properties, has enabled the development and coformulation of a few of these STRs and FDCs. Also, a newer tenofovir salt formulation, TAF, has an advantageous pharmacokinetic profile, contributing to better overall renal and bone tolerability compared with TDF. Further simplification regimens comprising dual ART therapies are currently being explored. This review provides an overview of the clinical efficacy and safety data for these coformulated agents, highlighting the relative impact on comparative adverse events, assessing the potential for experiencing fewer drug‐drug interactions, and discussing the clinical implications regarding adherence to treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]