User login
Preop nivolumab plus chemo ‘a quantum leap’ in NSCLC therapy
NEW ORLEANS – For patients with resectable non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), further
The combination resulted in significantly longer event-free survival and a 14-fold greater chance of having a pathological complete response compared with chemotherapy alone.
Adding immunotherapy (IO) to chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting represents “a quantum leap in lung cancer therapy,” commented David P. Carbone, MD, PhD, director of the James Thoracic Center at Ohio State University, Columbus.
“Combining IO with surgery I think is a new standard of care and will almost certainly improve overall survival [OS] in early-stage disease, for the first time in decades, in my entire career,” he said while discussing the new data at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research.
The data come from the phase 3 CheckMate 816 study, an open-label trial involving patients with stage IB-IIIA resectable NSCLC. The study was published in the New England Journal of Medicine to coincide with the presentation.
Results from this trial were the basis of the Food and Drug Administration’s recent approval of neoadjuvant therapy with nivolumab (Opdivo) and platinum-based chemotherapy in this population, which one expert described as “a turning point in how we treat resectable NSCLC.”
“Neoadjuvant IO has multiple theoretical advantages of over adjuvant IO,” commented Dr. Carbone. “CheckMate 816 suggests that practice will prove this theory correct.”
Importance of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy
New details of the results were presented at the meeting by Nicolas Girard, MD, from Institut Curie in Paris.
Among 358 patients in the trial, the median event-free survival (EFS) was 31.6 months for patients randomly assigned to the combination of the immune checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab and platinum-base chemotherapy, compared with 20.8 months for patients assigned to chemotherapy alone. This translated into a hazard ratio for disease recurrence, progression, or death of 0.63 (P = .005).
In addition, 24% of patients assigned to the nivolumab plus chemotherapy arm had a pathological complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant therapy, compared with only 2.2% of those assigned to chemotherapy alone (P < .001).
Dr. Girard said the study provided important clues to the importance of neoadjuvant therapy for improving objective responses.
“Event-free survival was improved in patients with a pathological complete response, compared with those without, suggesting pCR is a surrogate endpoint for long-term outcomes in resectable non–small cell lung cancer, and this is the first time [this has been shown] in a randomized, phase 3 study,” he said.
Neoadjuvant slow to catch on
About one -fourth of all patients who are diagnosed with NSCLC have resectable disease, Dr. Girard and colleagues noted. However, 30%-55% of patients who undergo surgery with curative intent ultimately experience recurrence and die from their disease.
Neoadjuvant therapy may improve chances for complete resection and prevent or delay recurrence after surgery, but the absolute difference in 5-year recurrence-free survival and OS with neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone is only about 6%, they noted.
The new results suggest that adding neoadjuvant immunotherapy to chemotherapy will improve upon this, although so far, the OS data from this trial are immature.
In an interim analysis, the median OS rate was 83% at 2 years for patients treated with nivolumab plus chemotherapy, compared with 71% for patients treated with chemotherapy alone. The published results show a significant improvement in the two primary endpoints – EFS and pCR.
In an editorial accompanying the study, Christine M. Lovly, MD, PhD, from the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn., commented that the results of the trial are expected to change practice.
“However, several issues remain to be addressed,” she wrote. “First, is a pathological complete response predictive of event-free survival? Can event-free survival be used as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival? Second, although not mandated for this trial, approximately 20% of the patients received postoperative therapy. Is adjuvant therapy necessary? What criteria should be used to select patients to receive adjuvant therapy?”
Dr. Lovly also pointed out that patients with tumors harboring mutations in the genes EGFR or ALK were excluded from the trial.
“Therefore, implementation of neoadjuvant therapies requires biomarker testing for patients with early-stage disease at the time of diagnosis, a considerable alteration in the routine practice of lung-cancer medicine,” she wrote.
Fears of delaying surgery
In an interview, Upal Basu Roy, PhD, MPH, executive director of research at the LUNGevity Foundation, who was not involved in the study, gave a reason why neoadjuvant therapy is not more widely prescribed for patients with resectable NSCLC.
“Clinicians are always scared, and I think patients are as well, that giving a treatment before surgery would delay surgery,” he said. “When patients are diagnosed with lung cancer and they’re told that surgery offers the potential of cure and then hear that you’re giving them a treatment before surgery and that treatment may potentially delay surgery, that is a huge source of anxiety.”
In addition, clinicians until recently were unsure about which patients were most likely to benefit from neoadjuvant therapy when the only option was chemotherapy, “but that’s changing, obviously, with the recent approval of neoadjuvant nivolumab through CheckMate 816,” he said.
CheckMate 816 details
In the CheckMate 816 study, investigators enrolled patients with newly diagnosed resectable NSCLC (stage IB-IIIA) who had good performance status and no known sensitizing EGFR mutations or ALK alterations.
After stratification by stage, programmed death–1 status, and sex, the team randomly assigned patients to receive either nivolumab 360 mg plus platinum-based chemotherapy every 3 weeks for a total of three cycles or chemotherapy alone.
At the end of neoadjuvant therapy, patients underwent radiologic restaging and surgery within 6 weeks. Patients could also receive optional adjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy.
Of the 179 patients in each arm, 176 received the assigned treatment. In all, 149 (83%) of those assigned to the combination had definitive surgery, as did 135 (75%) of those assigned to chemotherapy alone.
In addition, 35 patients (20%) of those assigned to nivolumab-chemo and 56 (32%) assigned to chemotherapy alone received adjuvant therapy.
The coprimary endpoints of EFS and pCR favored the combination, both in the overall population and across most subgroups, including patients younger than 65, men and women, Asian patients, those with stage IIIA disease, nonsquamous histology, current smokers and never-smokers, and patients with higher levels of PD–ligand 1 expression.
The rates of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events were similar between the groups, at 33.5% with the combination and 36.9% with chemotherapy alone.
Rates of adverse events leading to study discontinuation, treatment-related adverse events, and surgery-related adverse events were similar between the groups. There were two treatment-related deaths, both in the chemotherapy-alone arm.
CheckMate 816 was funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb (manufacturer of nivolumab). Girard has consulted for and has received grant support from Bristol-Myers Squibb and other companies. Dr. Carbone has consulted for Bristol-Myers Squibb and other companies. Dr. Lovly has consulted for various companies. Dr. Roy has received grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb to the LUNGevity Foundation.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
NEW ORLEANS – For patients with resectable non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), further
The combination resulted in significantly longer event-free survival and a 14-fold greater chance of having a pathological complete response compared with chemotherapy alone.
Adding immunotherapy (IO) to chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting represents “a quantum leap in lung cancer therapy,” commented David P. Carbone, MD, PhD, director of the James Thoracic Center at Ohio State University, Columbus.
“Combining IO with surgery I think is a new standard of care and will almost certainly improve overall survival [OS] in early-stage disease, for the first time in decades, in my entire career,” he said while discussing the new data at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research.
The data come from the phase 3 CheckMate 816 study, an open-label trial involving patients with stage IB-IIIA resectable NSCLC. The study was published in the New England Journal of Medicine to coincide with the presentation.
Results from this trial were the basis of the Food and Drug Administration’s recent approval of neoadjuvant therapy with nivolumab (Opdivo) and platinum-based chemotherapy in this population, which one expert described as “a turning point in how we treat resectable NSCLC.”
“Neoadjuvant IO has multiple theoretical advantages of over adjuvant IO,” commented Dr. Carbone. “CheckMate 816 suggests that practice will prove this theory correct.”
Importance of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy
New details of the results were presented at the meeting by Nicolas Girard, MD, from Institut Curie in Paris.
Among 358 patients in the trial, the median event-free survival (EFS) was 31.6 months for patients randomly assigned to the combination of the immune checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab and platinum-base chemotherapy, compared with 20.8 months for patients assigned to chemotherapy alone. This translated into a hazard ratio for disease recurrence, progression, or death of 0.63 (P = .005).
In addition, 24% of patients assigned to the nivolumab plus chemotherapy arm had a pathological complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant therapy, compared with only 2.2% of those assigned to chemotherapy alone (P < .001).
Dr. Girard said the study provided important clues to the importance of neoadjuvant therapy for improving objective responses.
“Event-free survival was improved in patients with a pathological complete response, compared with those without, suggesting pCR is a surrogate endpoint for long-term outcomes in resectable non–small cell lung cancer, and this is the first time [this has been shown] in a randomized, phase 3 study,” he said.
Neoadjuvant slow to catch on
About one -fourth of all patients who are diagnosed with NSCLC have resectable disease, Dr. Girard and colleagues noted. However, 30%-55% of patients who undergo surgery with curative intent ultimately experience recurrence and die from their disease.
Neoadjuvant therapy may improve chances for complete resection and prevent or delay recurrence after surgery, but the absolute difference in 5-year recurrence-free survival and OS with neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone is only about 6%, they noted.
The new results suggest that adding neoadjuvant immunotherapy to chemotherapy will improve upon this, although so far, the OS data from this trial are immature.
In an interim analysis, the median OS rate was 83% at 2 years for patients treated with nivolumab plus chemotherapy, compared with 71% for patients treated with chemotherapy alone. The published results show a significant improvement in the two primary endpoints – EFS and pCR.
In an editorial accompanying the study, Christine M. Lovly, MD, PhD, from the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn., commented that the results of the trial are expected to change practice.
“However, several issues remain to be addressed,” she wrote. “First, is a pathological complete response predictive of event-free survival? Can event-free survival be used as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival? Second, although not mandated for this trial, approximately 20% of the patients received postoperative therapy. Is adjuvant therapy necessary? What criteria should be used to select patients to receive adjuvant therapy?”
Dr. Lovly also pointed out that patients with tumors harboring mutations in the genes EGFR or ALK were excluded from the trial.
“Therefore, implementation of neoadjuvant therapies requires biomarker testing for patients with early-stage disease at the time of diagnosis, a considerable alteration in the routine practice of lung-cancer medicine,” she wrote.
Fears of delaying surgery
In an interview, Upal Basu Roy, PhD, MPH, executive director of research at the LUNGevity Foundation, who was not involved in the study, gave a reason why neoadjuvant therapy is not more widely prescribed for patients with resectable NSCLC.
“Clinicians are always scared, and I think patients are as well, that giving a treatment before surgery would delay surgery,” he said. “When patients are diagnosed with lung cancer and they’re told that surgery offers the potential of cure and then hear that you’re giving them a treatment before surgery and that treatment may potentially delay surgery, that is a huge source of anxiety.”
In addition, clinicians until recently were unsure about which patients were most likely to benefit from neoadjuvant therapy when the only option was chemotherapy, “but that’s changing, obviously, with the recent approval of neoadjuvant nivolumab through CheckMate 816,” he said.
CheckMate 816 details
In the CheckMate 816 study, investigators enrolled patients with newly diagnosed resectable NSCLC (stage IB-IIIA) who had good performance status and no known sensitizing EGFR mutations or ALK alterations.
After stratification by stage, programmed death–1 status, and sex, the team randomly assigned patients to receive either nivolumab 360 mg plus platinum-based chemotherapy every 3 weeks for a total of three cycles or chemotherapy alone.
At the end of neoadjuvant therapy, patients underwent radiologic restaging and surgery within 6 weeks. Patients could also receive optional adjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy.
Of the 179 patients in each arm, 176 received the assigned treatment. In all, 149 (83%) of those assigned to the combination had definitive surgery, as did 135 (75%) of those assigned to chemotherapy alone.
In addition, 35 patients (20%) of those assigned to nivolumab-chemo and 56 (32%) assigned to chemotherapy alone received adjuvant therapy.
The coprimary endpoints of EFS and pCR favored the combination, both in the overall population and across most subgroups, including patients younger than 65, men and women, Asian patients, those with stage IIIA disease, nonsquamous histology, current smokers and never-smokers, and patients with higher levels of PD–ligand 1 expression.
The rates of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events were similar between the groups, at 33.5% with the combination and 36.9% with chemotherapy alone.
Rates of adverse events leading to study discontinuation, treatment-related adverse events, and surgery-related adverse events were similar between the groups. There were two treatment-related deaths, both in the chemotherapy-alone arm.
CheckMate 816 was funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb (manufacturer of nivolumab). Girard has consulted for and has received grant support from Bristol-Myers Squibb and other companies. Dr. Carbone has consulted for Bristol-Myers Squibb and other companies. Dr. Lovly has consulted for various companies. Dr. Roy has received grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb to the LUNGevity Foundation.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
NEW ORLEANS – For patients with resectable non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), further
The combination resulted in significantly longer event-free survival and a 14-fold greater chance of having a pathological complete response compared with chemotherapy alone.
Adding immunotherapy (IO) to chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting represents “a quantum leap in lung cancer therapy,” commented David P. Carbone, MD, PhD, director of the James Thoracic Center at Ohio State University, Columbus.
“Combining IO with surgery I think is a new standard of care and will almost certainly improve overall survival [OS] in early-stage disease, for the first time in decades, in my entire career,” he said while discussing the new data at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research.
The data come from the phase 3 CheckMate 816 study, an open-label trial involving patients with stage IB-IIIA resectable NSCLC. The study was published in the New England Journal of Medicine to coincide with the presentation.
Results from this trial were the basis of the Food and Drug Administration’s recent approval of neoadjuvant therapy with nivolumab (Opdivo) and platinum-based chemotherapy in this population, which one expert described as “a turning point in how we treat resectable NSCLC.”
“Neoadjuvant IO has multiple theoretical advantages of over adjuvant IO,” commented Dr. Carbone. “CheckMate 816 suggests that practice will prove this theory correct.”
Importance of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy
New details of the results were presented at the meeting by Nicolas Girard, MD, from Institut Curie in Paris.
Among 358 patients in the trial, the median event-free survival (EFS) was 31.6 months for patients randomly assigned to the combination of the immune checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab and platinum-base chemotherapy, compared with 20.8 months for patients assigned to chemotherapy alone. This translated into a hazard ratio for disease recurrence, progression, or death of 0.63 (P = .005).
In addition, 24% of patients assigned to the nivolumab plus chemotherapy arm had a pathological complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant therapy, compared with only 2.2% of those assigned to chemotherapy alone (P < .001).
Dr. Girard said the study provided important clues to the importance of neoadjuvant therapy for improving objective responses.
“Event-free survival was improved in patients with a pathological complete response, compared with those without, suggesting pCR is a surrogate endpoint for long-term outcomes in resectable non–small cell lung cancer, and this is the first time [this has been shown] in a randomized, phase 3 study,” he said.
Neoadjuvant slow to catch on
About one -fourth of all patients who are diagnosed with NSCLC have resectable disease, Dr. Girard and colleagues noted. However, 30%-55% of patients who undergo surgery with curative intent ultimately experience recurrence and die from their disease.
Neoadjuvant therapy may improve chances for complete resection and prevent or delay recurrence after surgery, but the absolute difference in 5-year recurrence-free survival and OS with neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone is only about 6%, they noted.
The new results suggest that adding neoadjuvant immunotherapy to chemotherapy will improve upon this, although so far, the OS data from this trial are immature.
In an interim analysis, the median OS rate was 83% at 2 years for patients treated with nivolumab plus chemotherapy, compared with 71% for patients treated with chemotherapy alone. The published results show a significant improvement in the two primary endpoints – EFS and pCR.
In an editorial accompanying the study, Christine M. Lovly, MD, PhD, from the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn., commented that the results of the trial are expected to change practice.
“However, several issues remain to be addressed,” she wrote. “First, is a pathological complete response predictive of event-free survival? Can event-free survival be used as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival? Second, although not mandated for this trial, approximately 20% of the patients received postoperative therapy. Is adjuvant therapy necessary? What criteria should be used to select patients to receive adjuvant therapy?”
Dr. Lovly also pointed out that patients with tumors harboring mutations in the genes EGFR or ALK were excluded from the trial.
“Therefore, implementation of neoadjuvant therapies requires biomarker testing for patients with early-stage disease at the time of diagnosis, a considerable alteration in the routine practice of lung-cancer medicine,” she wrote.
Fears of delaying surgery
In an interview, Upal Basu Roy, PhD, MPH, executive director of research at the LUNGevity Foundation, who was not involved in the study, gave a reason why neoadjuvant therapy is not more widely prescribed for patients with resectable NSCLC.
“Clinicians are always scared, and I think patients are as well, that giving a treatment before surgery would delay surgery,” he said. “When patients are diagnosed with lung cancer and they’re told that surgery offers the potential of cure and then hear that you’re giving them a treatment before surgery and that treatment may potentially delay surgery, that is a huge source of anxiety.”
In addition, clinicians until recently were unsure about which patients were most likely to benefit from neoadjuvant therapy when the only option was chemotherapy, “but that’s changing, obviously, with the recent approval of neoadjuvant nivolumab through CheckMate 816,” he said.
CheckMate 816 details
In the CheckMate 816 study, investigators enrolled patients with newly diagnosed resectable NSCLC (stage IB-IIIA) who had good performance status and no known sensitizing EGFR mutations or ALK alterations.
After stratification by stage, programmed death–1 status, and sex, the team randomly assigned patients to receive either nivolumab 360 mg plus platinum-based chemotherapy every 3 weeks for a total of three cycles or chemotherapy alone.
At the end of neoadjuvant therapy, patients underwent radiologic restaging and surgery within 6 weeks. Patients could also receive optional adjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy.
Of the 179 patients in each arm, 176 received the assigned treatment. In all, 149 (83%) of those assigned to the combination had definitive surgery, as did 135 (75%) of those assigned to chemotherapy alone.
In addition, 35 patients (20%) of those assigned to nivolumab-chemo and 56 (32%) assigned to chemotherapy alone received adjuvant therapy.
The coprimary endpoints of EFS and pCR favored the combination, both in the overall population and across most subgroups, including patients younger than 65, men and women, Asian patients, those with stage IIIA disease, nonsquamous histology, current smokers and never-smokers, and patients with higher levels of PD–ligand 1 expression.
The rates of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events were similar between the groups, at 33.5% with the combination and 36.9% with chemotherapy alone.
Rates of adverse events leading to study discontinuation, treatment-related adverse events, and surgery-related adverse events were similar between the groups. There were two treatment-related deaths, both in the chemotherapy-alone arm.
CheckMate 816 was funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb (manufacturer of nivolumab). Girard has consulted for and has received grant support from Bristol-Myers Squibb and other companies. Dr. Carbone has consulted for Bristol-Myers Squibb and other companies. Dr. Lovly has consulted for various companies. Dr. Roy has received grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb to the LUNGevity Foundation.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
AT AACR 2022
Made-to-order TILs effective against metastatic melanoma
NEW ORLEANS – In just over one-third of patients with metastatic melanoma who had experienced disease progression while receiving multiple prior lines of therapy, including immunotherapy and targeted agents,
The product, called lifileucel, is custom made for each patient and utilizes tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) extracted from tumor lesions. This approach differs from other cell-based therapies, such as chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy, which utilizes T cells collected from the patient’s blood.
The new results come from a phase 2 trial conducted in 66 patients with previously treated unresectable or metastatic melanoma who received a single dose of the product. The objective response rate was 36.4%.
“Lifileucel has demonstrated efficacy and durability of response for patients with metastatic melanoma and represents a viable therapeutic option warranting further investigation,” commented Jason Alan Chesney, MD, PhD, from the James Graham Brown Cancer Center, the University of Louisville (Ky.).
He presented the new data at the virtual American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) Annual Meeting 2021.
Customized cell therapy with TILs has been explored for the treatment of melanoma for more than a decade. Some researchers have reported durable response in 25% of patients.
However, “generalizing TIL therapy has been hampered by the complex and really not absolutely defined process for generating cells,” commented Philip Greenberg, MD, professor and head of the program in immunology in the Clinical Research Division of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, who was the invited discussant.
The current study demonstrates that cell generation can be performed at a centralized facility that has the required technical expertise. The patient-specific products are then disseminated to multiple centers, he said. The study also demonstrates that TILs can be successfully generated from tumor sites other than skin or lymph nodes.
“Toxicity was, however, significant, although it was generally manageable, and it did occur early, generally within the first 2 weeks,” he noted.
Patient-derived product
Lifileucel is a tailor-made immunotherapy product created from melanoma tumor tissues resected from lesions in skin, lymph nodes, liver, lung, peritoneum, musculoskeletal system, breast, or other visceral organs. The cells are shipped to a central manufacturing facility, whre the TILs are isolated, cultured, expanded, and reinvigorated. The cells are then harvested and cryopreserved. The process takes about 22 days. The cryopreserved product is then shipped back to the treating facility.
Prior to receiving the expanded and rejuvenated TILs, patients undergo myeloablative conditioning with cyclophosphamide followed by fludarabine. The TILs are then delivered in a single infusion, followed by administration of up to six doses of interleukin-2 (IL-2).
Details from clinical trial
At the meeting, Dr. Chesney reported details on the 66 patients in the trial. They had metastatic melanoma that was progressing on treatment. The mean number of prior lines of therapy was 3.3. All of the patients had received prior anti–programmed cell death protein–1 (PD-1) or programmed cell death–ligand-1 (PD-L1) agents; 53 had received a cytotoxic T lymphocyte protein 4 (CTLA-4) inhibitor; and 15 had received a BRAF/MEK inhibitor.
These patients had a mean of six baseline target and nontarget lesions, and 28 patients had liver and/or brain metastases.
Just over a third of patients (24 of 66, 36.4%) had an objective response; three patients had a complete response; and 21 had a partial response. In addition, 29 patients had stable disease, and nine experienced disease progression. Four patients had not undergone the first assessment at the time of data cutoff.
After a median follow-up of 28.1 months, the median duration of response was not reached. It ranged from 2.2 to > 35.2 months.
Since the data cutoff in April 2020, reduction of tumor burden has occurred in 50 of 62 evaluable patients. Reductions in the target lesion sum of diameters has occurred in 11 patients. In one patient, a partial response converted to a complete response 24 months after infusion, Dr. Chesney noted.
The mean number of TILs infused was 27.3 billion (27.3 x 109). Appropriate amounts of TILs were manufactured from tumor samples acquired across all sites, and reductions in target lesion sum of diameter were seen across the range of TIL total cell doses.
All patients experienced at least one adverse event of any grade; all but two experienced grade 3 or 4 adverse events. Two patients died, one as a result of intra-abdominal hemorrhage considered possibly related to TIL therapy, and one from acute respiratory failure deemed not related to TILs.
The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were thrombocytopenia, anemia, febrile neutropenia, neutropenia, hypophosphatemia, and lymphopenia.
“The adverse event profile was manageable and was consistent with the underlying and the known profiles of the nonmyeloblative depletion regimen and IL-2,” Dr. Chesney said.
The decreasing frequency of adverse events over time reflects the potential benefit of the one-time infusion, and no new safety risks have been identified during more than 2 years of follow-up, he added.
Remaining questions, next steps
Dr. Greenberg commented that the one of the limitations of the study is that the investigators did not characterize the TIL product.
“Studies have predicted that there’s a particular type of cell, a stemlike T cell, that’s responsible for mediating the efficacy,” he commented. He referred to research from Steven Rosenberg, MD, PhD, and colleagues at the National Cancer Institute, where TILs were first used in 2002.
Dr. Greenberg also raised the question of whether high-dose IL-2 was required post infusion, given that the patients were lymphodepleted before receiving lifileucel.
Future steps for TIL therapy, he said, should include identification of biomarkers for success or failure; strategies to enhance generation and expansion of tumor-reactive T cells; postinfusion strategies, such as using vaccines and/or checkpoint inhibitors to increase therapeutic activity; genetic modifications to enhance the function of TILs in the tumor microenvironment; and research into other tumor types that may be effectively treated with TILs.
The study was supported by Iovance Biotherapeutics. Dr. Chesney has received research funding from Iovance and other companies and has consulted for Amgen and Replimune. Dr. Greenberg has served on scientific advisory boards, has received grant/research support, and owns stock in several companies that do not include Iovance.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
NEW ORLEANS – In just over one-third of patients with metastatic melanoma who had experienced disease progression while receiving multiple prior lines of therapy, including immunotherapy and targeted agents,
The product, called lifileucel, is custom made for each patient and utilizes tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) extracted from tumor lesions. This approach differs from other cell-based therapies, such as chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy, which utilizes T cells collected from the patient’s blood.
The new results come from a phase 2 trial conducted in 66 patients with previously treated unresectable or metastatic melanoma who received a single dose of the product. The objective response rate was 36.4%.
“Lifileucel has demonstrated efficacy and durability of response for patients with metastatic melanoma and represents a viable therapeutic option warranting further investigation,” commented Jason Alan Chesney, MD, PhD, from the James Graham Brown Cancer Center, the University of Louisville (Ky.).
He presented the new data at the virtual American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) Annual Meeting 2021.
Customized cell therapy with TILs has been explored for the treatment of melanoma for more than a decade. Some researchers have reported durable response in 25% of patients.
However, “generalizing TIL therapy has been hampered by the complex and really not absolutely defined process for generating cells,” commented Philip Greenberg, MD, professor and head of the program in immunology in the Clinical Research Division of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, who was the invited discussant.
The current study demonstrates that cell generation can be performed at a centralized facility that has the required technical expertise. The patient-specific products are then disseminated to multiple centers, he said. The study also demonstrates that TILs can be successfully generated from tumor sites other than skin or lymph nodes.
“Toxicity was, however, significant, although it was generally manageable, and it did occur early, generally within the first 2 weeks,” he noted.
Patient-derived product
Lifileucel is a tailor-made immunotherapy product created from melanoma tumor tissues resected from lesions in skin, lymph nodes, liver, lung, peritoneum, musculoskeletal system, breast, or other visceral organs. The cells are shipped to a central manufacturing facility, whre the TILs are isolated, cultured, expanded, and reinvigorated. The cells are then harvested and cryopreserved. The process takes about 22 days. The cryopreserved product is then shipped back to the treating facility.
Prior to receiving the expanded and rejuvenated TILs, patients undergo myeloablative conditioning with cyclophosphamide followed by fludarabine. The TILs are then delivered in a single infusion, followed by administration of up to six doses of interleukin-2 (IL-2).
Details from clinical trial
At the meeting, Dr. Chesney reported details on the 66 patients in the trial. They had metastatic melanoma that was progressing on treatment. The mean number of prior lines of therapy was 3.3. All of the patients had received prior anti–programmed cell death protein–1 (PD-1) or programmed cell death–ligand-1 (PD-L1) agents; 53 had received a cytotoxic T lymphocyte protein 4 (CTLA-4) inhibitor; and 15 had received a BRAF/MEK inhibitor.
These patients had a mean of six baseline target and nontarget lesions, and 28 patients had liver and/or brain metastases.
Just over a third of patients (24 of 66, 36.4%) had an objective response; three patients had a complete response; and 21 had a partial response. In addition, 29 patients had stable disease, and nine experienced disease progression. Four patients had not undergone the first assessment at the time of data cutoff.
After a median follow-up of 28.1 months, the median duration of response was not reached. It ranged from 2.2 to > 35.2 months.
Since the data cutoff in April 2020, reduction of tumor burden has occurred in 50 of 62 evaluable patients. Reductions in the target lesion sum of diameters has occurred in 11 patients. In one patient, a partial response converted to a complete response 24 months after infusion, Dr. Chesney noted.
The mean number of TILs infused was 27.3 billion (27.3 x 109). Appropriate amounts of TILs were manufactured from tumor samples acquired across all sites, and reductions in target lesion sum of diameter were seen across the range of TIL total cell doses.
All patients experienced at least one adverse event of any grade; all but two experienced grade 3 or 4 adverse events. Two patients died, one as a result of intra-abdominal hemorrhage considered possibly related to TIL therapy, and one from acute respiratory failure deemed not related to TILs.
The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were thrombocytopenia, anemia, febrile neutropenia, neutropenia, hypophosphatemia, and lymphopenia.
“The adverse event profile was manageable and was consistent with the underlying and the known profiles of the nonmyeloblative depletion regimen and IL-2,” Dr. Chesney said.
The decreasing frequency of adverse events over time reflects the potential benefit of the one-time infusion, and no new safety risks have been identified during more than 2 years of follow-up, he added.
Remaining questions, next steps
Dr. Greenberg commented that the one of the limitations of the study is that the investigators did not characterize the TIL product.
“Studies have predicted that there’s a particular type of cell, a stemlike T cell, that’s responsible for mediating the efficacy,” he commented. He referred to research from Steven Rosenberg, MD, PhD, and colleagues at the National Cancer Institute, where TILs were first used in 2002.
Dr. Greenberg also raised the question of whether high-dose IL-2 was required post infusion, given that the patients were lymphodepleted before receiving lifileucel.
Future steps for TIL therapy, he said, should include identification of biomarkers for success or failure; strategies to enhance generation and expansion of tumor-reactive T cells; postinfusion strategies, such as using vaccines and/or checkpoint inhibitors to increase therapeutic activity; genetic modifications to enhance the function of TILs in the tumor microenvironment; and research into other tumor types that may be effectively treated with TILs.
The study was supported by Iovance Biotherapeutics. Dr. Chesney has received research funding from Iovance and other companies and has consulted for Amgen and Replimune. Dr. Greenberg has served on scientific advisory boards, has received grant/research support, and owns stock in several companies that do not include Iovance.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
NEW ORLEANS – In just over one-third of patients with metastatic melanoma who had experienced disease progression while receiving multiple prior lines of therapy, including immunotherapy and targeted agents,
The product, called lifileucel, is custom made for each patient and utilizes tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) extracted from tumor lesions. This approach differs from other cell-based therapies, such as chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy, which utilizes T cells collected from the patient’s blood.
The new results come from a phase 2 trial conducted in 66 patients with previously treated unresectable or metastatic melanoma who received a single dose of the product. The objective response rate was 36.4%.
“Lifileucel has demonstrated efficacy and durability of response for patients with metastatic melanoma and represents a viable therapeutic option warranting further investigation,” commented Jason Alan Chesney, MD, PhD, from the James Graham Brown Cancer Center, the University of Louisville (Ky.).
He presented the new data at the virtual American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) Annual Meeting 2021.
Customized cell therapy with TILs has been explored for the treatment of melanoma for more than a decade. Some researchers have reported durable response in 25% of patients.
However, “generalizing TIL therapy has been hampered by the complex and really not absolutely defined process for generating cells,” commented Philip Greenberg, MD, professor and head of the program in immunology in the Clinical Research Division of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, who was the invited discussant.
The current study demonstrates that cell generation can be performed at a centralized facility that has the required technical expertise. The patient-specific products are then disseminated to multiple centers, he said. The study also demonstrates that TILs can be successfully generated from tumor sites other than skin or lymph nodes.
“Toxicity was, however, significant, although it was generally manageable, and it did occur early, generally within the first 2 weeks,” he noted.
Patient-derived product
Lifileucel is a tailor-made immunotherapy product created from melanoma tumor tissues resected from lesions in skin, lymph nodes, liver, lung, peritoneum, musculoskeletal system, breast, or other visceral organs. The cells are shipped to a central manufacturing facility, whre the TILs are isolated, cultured, expanded, and reinvigorated. The cells are then harvested and cryopreserved. The process takes about 22 days. The cryopreserved product is then shipped back to the treating facility.
Prior to receiving the expanded and rejuvenated TILs, patients undergo myeloablative conditioning with cyclophosphamide followed by fludarabine. The TILs are then delivered in a single infusion, followed by administration of up to six doses of interleukin-2 (IL-2).
Details from clinical trial
At the meeting, Dr. Chesney reported details on the 66 patients in the trial. They had metastatic melanoma that was progressing on treatment. The mean number of prior lines of therapy was 3.3. All of the patients had received prior anti–programmed cell death protein–1 (PD-1) or programmed cell death–ligand-1 (PD-L1) agents; 53 had received a cytotoxic T lymphocyte protein 4 (CTLA-4) inhibitor; and 15 had received a BRAF/MEK inhibitor.
These patients had a mean of six baseline target and nontarget lesions, and 28 patients had liver and/or brain metastases.
Just over a third of patients (24 of 66, 36.4%) had an objective response; three patients had a complete response; and 21 had a partial response. In addition, 29 patients had stable disease, and nine experienced disease progression. Four patients had not undergone the first assessment at the time of data cutoff.
After a median follow-up of 28.1 months, the median duration of response was not reached. It ranged from 2.2 to > 35.2 months.
Since the data cutoff in April 2020, reduction of tumor burden has occurred in 50 of 62 evaluable patients. Reductions in the target lesion sum of diameters has occurred in 11 patients. In one patient, a partial response converted to a complete response 24 months after infusion, Dr. Chesney noted.
The mean number of TILs infused was 27.3 billion (27.3 x 109). Appropriate amounts of TILs were manufactured from tumor samples acquired across all sites, and reductions in target lesion sum of diameter were seen across the range of TIL total cell doses.
All patients experienced at least one adverse event of any grade; all but two experienced grade 3 or 4 adverse events. Two patients died, one as a result of intra-abdominal hemorrhage considered possibly related to TIL therapy, and one from acute respiratory failure deemed not related to TILs.
The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were thrombocytopenia, anemia, febrile neutropenia, neutropenia, hypophosphatemia, and lymphopenia.
“The adverse event profile was manageable and was consistent with the underlying and the known profiles of the nonmyeloblative depletion regimen and IL-2,” Dr. Chesney said.
The decreasing frequency of adverse events over time reflects the potential benefit of the one-time infusion, and no new safety risks have been identified during more than 2 years of follow-up, he added.
Remaining questions, next steps
Dr. Greenberg commented that the one of the limitations of the study is that the investigators did not characterize the TIL product.
“Studies have predicted that there’s a particular type of cell, a stemlike T cell, that’s responsible for mediating the efficacy,” he commented. He referred to research from Steven Rosenberg, MD, PhD, and colleagues at the National Cancer Institute, where TILs were first used in 2002.
Dr. Greenberg also raised the question of whether high-dose IL-2 was required post infusion, given that the patients were lymphodepleted before receiving lifileucel.
Future steps for TIL therapy, he said, should include identification of biomarkers for success or failure; strategies to enhance generation and expansion of tumor-reactive T cells; postinfusion strategies, such as using vaccines and/or checkpoint inhibitors to increase therapeutic activity; genetic modifications to enhance the function of TILs in the tumor microenvironment; and research into other tumor types that may be effectively treated with TILs.
The study was supported by Iovance Biotherapeutics. Dr. Chesney has received research funding from Iovance and other companies and has consulted for Amgen and Replimune. Dr. Greenberg has served on scientific advisory boards, has received grant/research support, and owns stock in several companies that do not include Iovance.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
AT AACR 2022
‘Major advance’: Sotorasib benefit persists in KRAS+ NSCLC
NEW ORLEANS – with the first-in-class KRAS inhibitor sotorasib (Lumakras, Amgen).
The finding comes from an analysis of long-term follow-up data from the CodeBreaK100 trial, which showed a 2-year overall survival (OS) rate of 32.5% in pretreated patients with KRASG12C-mutant disease.
That rate compares favorably with historical data on NSCLC therapies, said Grace K. Dy, MD, from Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center in Buffalo, N.Y.
“We expect about half of that [survival rate] in patients who are treated with docetaxel,” she said in a plenary session at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research.
Sotorasib was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in May 2021 as the first drug for patients with NSCLC and KRAS mutations and was described as a “historic milestone.”
In this most recent analysis, which combined data from patients enrolled in phases 1 and 2 of the trial, the “objective response rate of 41% of patients was achieved with sotorasib, with a durable [disease] control rate of 84% and a median duration of response of 12.3 months, with no new safety signals emerging,” she said.
Nearly one-fourth of patients saw long-term benefit, as defined by progression-free survival of at least 12 months, and this long-term benefit was seen across variant allele frequencies of KRASG12C, programmed death–ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score, and other comutations, she noted.
“KRASG12C inhibitors represent a major advance in the treatment of KRAS-mutant lung cancers and other types as well,” said invited discussant Mark M. Awad, MD, PhD, director of clinical research at the Lowe Center for Thoracic Oncology at Dana-Farber Cancer Center, Boston.
He cautioned, however, that “the therapeutic efficacy of these G12C inhibitors is currently limited by several things, including patient factors, intrinsic biology, and the emergence of complex resistance mechanisms.”
New approaches will be needed, he said, “to delay and overcome drug resistance to hopefully keep kicking cancer’s KRAS.”
At a media briefing where Dr. Dy presented the data prior to the oral abstract session, moderator Timothy A. Yap, MBBS, PhD, from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, commented that the development of drug resistance is common in oncology.
“That is exactly why we’re now actively working on multiple different combinatorial approaches in the clinic. There have been pretty compelling data published from Mirati [Therapeutics] and from other companies, from Amgen, that really show the resistance mechanisms that actually come about upon monotherapy with KRASG12C inhibitors, including CDK4/6, including P13K-Akt pathways,” he said.
“The solution there really is, No. 1, we need to identify proactively the resistance mechanisms involved and driving each cancer’s resistance, and No. 2, then apply the combinatorial agent, to bring in a combination that’s a rational approach to match a patient’s molecular profile upon resistance,” he said.
Tarnished triumph
As previously reported, sotorasib was hailed as “a triumph of drug discovery” when early results of the trial were reported at the European Society of Medical Oncology annual meeting in 2020.
Sotorasib is a small-molecule, specific, and irreversible inhibitor of KRAS that interacts with a “pocket” on the gene’s surface that is present only in an inactive conformation of KRAS. The drug inhibits oncogenic signaling and tumorigenesis by preventing cycling of the oncogene into its active form.
But as Dr. Awad reported at the 2021 AACR annual meeting, the efficacy of sotorasib and other KRAS inhibitors in development has been threatened by the development of resistance caused by a wide range of genomic and histologic mechanisms.
Dr. Awad reported that among 30 patients with NSCLC or colorectal cancer bearing the KRASG12C mutation who had disease progression while being treated with the investigational inhibitor adagrasib in clinical trials, investigators found multiple on-target KRAS alterations and off-target bypass mechanisms of acquired resistance to the drug.
“Diverse mechanisms confer resistance to the KRASG12C inhibitors, including secondary KRAS mutations, MAP [mitogen-activated protein] kinase pathway alterations, acquired genomic rearrangements, and histologic transformation,” he said.
Long follow-up
The long-term data reported at the 2022 meeting by Dr. Dy and colleagues included data on 48 patients enrolled in phase 1 of the trial, which had a primary endpoint of safety and tolerability, and 126 patients enrolled in phase 2, with a primary endpoint of objective response rate by blinded independent review.
The trial was conducted in centers in the United States, Europe, Australia, Japan, and South Korea.
Nearly all patients were pretreated: 92.5% of patients had received prior platinum-based chemotherapy and 90.2% had received anti–PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy.
Patients received oral sotorasib 960 mg once daily and were followed with radiographic scans every 6 weeks for the first year and once every 12 weeks thereafter.
Of the 174 patients enrolled, two were not evaluable for response at 2 years because of a lack of measurable lesions at baseline.
At a median follow-up of 24.9 months, 5 patients (2.9%) had a complete response and 65 (37.8%) had a partial response, for an objective response rate of 40.7%. An additional 74 patients (43%) had stable disease, for a disease control rate of 83.7%. Of the remaining patients, 23 (13.4%) had disease progression, and 5 were either not evaluable or had missing scan data.
Median progression-free survival was 6.3 months. Median time to response was 6 weeks, and median duration of response was 12.3 months. Half of patients who had a response retained that response for at least 12 months.
Median OS was 12.5 months. The 1-year and 2-year OS rates were 50.8% and 32.5%, respectively.
Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 21% of patients, and one patient had new-onset grade 3 hemolytic anemia 1 year after starting therapy. There were no treatment-related deaths and no treatment-related adverse events leading to discontinuation after the first year.
In exploratory analyses, the benefit of the drug was seen across tumors with varying levels of PD-L1 expression and the oncogenic STK11 comutation, and across KRASG12C variant allele frequency.
The investigators also reported that baseline circulating tumor DNA levels correlated with tumor burden, and that patients who had long-term benefits had lower baseline ctDNA. This finding is consistent with the documented role of ctDNA as a marker for poor prognosis regardless of therapy.
Dr. Dy reported receiving consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Mirati Therapeutics, and Takeda in the past 2 years. Dr. Yap disclosed receiving consulting fees from multiple companies. Dr. Awad disclosed consulting for multiple companies.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
NEW ORLEANS – with the first-in-class KRAS inhibitor sotorasib (Lumakras, Amgen).
The finding comes from an analysis of long-term follow-up data from the CodeBreaK100 trial, which showed a 2-year overall survival (OS) rate of 32.5% in pretreated patients with KRASG12C-mutant disease.
That rate compares favorably with historical data on NSCLC therapies, said Grace K. Dy, MD, from Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center in Buffalo, N.Y.
“We expect about half of that [survival rate] in patients who are treated with docetaxel,” she said in a plenary session at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research.
Sotorasib was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in May 2021 as the first drug for patients with NSCLC and KRAS mutations and was described as a “historic milestone.”
In this most recent analysis, which combined data from patients enrolled in phases 1 and 2 of the trial, the “objective response rate of 41% of patients was achieved with sotorasib, with a durable [disease] control rate of 84% and a median duration of response of 12.3 months, with no new safety signals emerging,” she said.
Nearly one-fourth of patients saw long-term benefit, as defined by progression-free survival of at least 12 months, and this long-term benefit was seen across variant allele frequencies of KRASG12C, programmed death–ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score, and other comutations, she noted.
“KRASG12C inhibitors represent a major advance in the treatment of KRAS-mutant lung cancers and other types as well,” said invited discussant Mark M. Awad, MD, PhD, director of clinical research at the Lowe Center for Thoracic Oncology at Dana-Farber Cancer Center, Boston.
He cautioned, however, that “the therapeutic efficacy of these G12C inhibitors is currently limited by several things, including patient factors, intrinsic biology, and the emergence of complex resistance mechanisms.”
New approaches will be needed, he said, “to delay and overcome drug resistance to hopefully keep kicking cancer’s KRAS.”
At a media briefing where Dr. Dy presented the data prior to the oral abstract session, moderator Timothy A. Yap, MBBS, PhD, from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, commented that the development of drug resistance is common in oncology.
“That is exactly why we’re now actively working on multiple different combinatorial approaches in the clinic. There have been pretty compelling data published from Mirati [Therapeutics] and from other companies, from Amgen, that really show the resistance mechanisms that actually come about upon monotherapy with KRASG12C inhibitors, including CDK4/6, including P13K-Akt pathways,” he said.
“The solution there really is, No. 1, we need to identify proactively the resistance mechanisms involved and driving each cancer’s resistance, and No. 2, then apply the combinatorial agent, to bring in a combination that’s a rational approach to match a patient’s molecular profile upon resistance,” he said.
Tarnished triumph
As previously reported, sotorasib was hailed as “a triumph of drug discovery” when early results of the trial were reported at the European Society of Medical Oncology annual meeting in 2020.
Sotorasib is a small-molecule, specific, and irreversible inhibitor of KRAS that interacts with a “pocket” on the gene’s surface that is present only in an inactive conformation of KRAS. The drug inhibits oncogenic signaling and tumorigenesis by preventing cycling of the oncogene into its active form.
But as Dr. Awad reported at the 2021 AACR annual meeting, the efficacy of sotorasib and other KRAS inhibitors in development has been threatened by the development of resistance caused by a wide range of genomic and histologic mechanisms.
Dr. Awad reported that among 30 patients with NSCLC or colorectal cancer bearing the KRASG12C mutation who had disease progression while being treated with the investigational inhibitor adagrasib in clinical trials, investigators found multiple on-target KRAS alterations and off-target bypass mechanisms of acquired resistance to the drug.
“Diverse mechanisms confer resistance to the KRASG12C inhibitors, including secondary KRAS mutations, MAP [mitogen-activated protein] kinase pathway alterations, acquired genomic rearrangements, and histologic transformation,” he said.
Long follow-up
The long-term data reported at the 2022 meeting by Dr. Dy and colleagues included data on 48 patients enrolled in phase 1 of the trial, which had a primary endpoint of safety and tolerability, and 126 patients enrolled in phase 2, with a primary endpoint of objective response rate by blinded independent review.
The trial was conducted in centers in the United States, Europe, Australia, Japan, and South Korea.
Nearly all patients were pretreated: 92.5% of patients had received prior platinum-based chemotherapy and 90.2% had received anti–PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy.
Patients received oral sotorasib 960 mg once daily and were followed with radiographic scans every 6 weeks for the first year and once every 12 weeks thereafter.
Of the 174 patients enrolled, two were not evaluable for response at 2 years because of a lack of measurable lesions at baseline.
At a median follow-up of 24.9 months, 5 patients (2.9%) had a complete response and 65 (37.8%) had a partial response, for an objective response rate of 40.7%. An additional 74 patients (43%) had stable disease, for a disease control rate of 83.7%. Of the remaining patients, 23 (13.4%) had disease progression, and 5 were either not evaluable or had missing scan data.
Median progression-free survival was 6.3 months. Median time to response was 6 weeks, and median duration of response was 12.3 months. Half of patients who had a response retained that response for at least 12 months.
Median OS was 12.5 months. The 1-year and 2-year OS rates were 50.8% and 32.5%, respectively.
Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 21% of patients, and one patient had new-onset grade 3 hemolytic anemia 1 year after starting therapy. There were no treatment-related deaths and no treatment-related adverse events leading to discontinuation after the first year.
In exploratory analyses, the benefit of the drug was seen across tumors with varying levels of PD-L1 expression and the oncogenic STK11 comutation, and across KRASG12C variant allele frequency.
The investigators also reported that baseline circulating tumor DNA levels correlated with tumor burden, and that patients who had long-term benefits had lower baseline ctDNA. This finding is consistent with the documented role of ctDNA as a marker for poor prognosis regardless of therapy.
Dr. Dy reported receiving consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Mirati Therapeutics, and Takeda in the past 2 years. Dr. Yap disclosed receiving consulting fees from multiple companies. Dr. Awad disclosed consulting for multiple companies.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
NEW ORLEANS – with the first-in-class KRAS inhibitor sotorasib (Lumakras, Amgen).
The finding comes from an analysis of long-term follow-up data from the CodeBreaK100 trial, which showed a 2-year overall survival (OS) rate of 32.5% in pretreated patients with KRASG12C-mutant disease.
That rate compares favorably with historical data on NSCLC therapies, said Grace K. Dy, MD, from Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center in Buffalo, N.Y.
“We expect about half of that [survival rate] in patients who are treated with docetaxel,” she said in a plenary session at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research.
Sotorasib was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in May 2021 as the first drug for patients with NSCLC and KRAS mutations and was described as a “historic milestone.”
In this most recent analysis, which combined data from patients enrolled in phases 1 and 2 of the trial, the “objective response rate of 41% of patients was achieved with sotorasib, with a durable [disease] control rate of 84% and a median duration of response of 12.3 months, with no new safety signals emerging,” she said.
Nearly one-fourth of patients saw long-term benefit, as defined by progression-free survival of at least 12 months, and this long-term benefit was seen across variant allele frequencies of KRASG12C, programmed death–ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score, and other comutations, she noted.
“KRASG12C inhibitors represent a major advance in the treatment of KRAS-mutant lung cancers and other types as well,” said invited discussant Mark M. Awad, MD, PhD, director of clinical research at the Lowe Center for Thoracic Oncology at Dana-Farber Cancer Center, Boston.
He cautioned, however, that “the therapeutic efficacy of these G12C inhibitors is currently limited by several things, including patient factors, intrinsic biology, and the emergence of complex resistance mechanisms.”
New approaches will be needed, he said, “to delay and overcome drug resistance to hopefully keep kicking cancer’s KRAS.”
At a media briefing where Dr. Dy presented the data prior to the oral abstract session, moderator Timothy A. Yap, MBBS, PhD, from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, commented that the development of drug resistance is common in oncology.
“That is exactly why we’re now actively working on multiple different combinatorial approaches in the clinic. There have been pretty compelling data published from Mirati [Therapeutics] and from other companies, from Amgen, that really show the resistance mechanisms that actually come about upon monotherapy with KRASG12C inhibitors, including CDK4/6, including P13K-Akt pathways,” he said.
“The solution there really is, No. 1, we need to identify proactively the resistance mechanisms involved and driving each cancer’s resistance, and No. 2, then apply the combinatorial agent, to bring in a combination that’s a rational approach to match a patient’s molecular profile upon resistance,” he said.
Tarnished triumph
As previously reported, sotorasib was hailed as “a triumph of drug discovery” when early results of the trial were reported at the European Society of Medical Oncology annual meeting in 2020.
Sotorasib is a small-molecule, specific, and irreversible inhibitor of KRAS that interacts with a “pocket” on the gene’s surface that is present only in an inactive conformation of KRAS. The drug inhibits oncogenic signaling and tumorigenesis by preventing cycling of the oncogene into its active form.
But as Dr. Awad reported at the 2021 AACR annual meeting, the efficacy of sotorasib and other KRAS inhibitors in development has been threatened by the development of resistance caused by a wide range of genomic and histologic mechanisms.
Dr. Awad reported that among 30 patients with NSCLC or colorectal cancer bearing the KRASG12C mutation who had disease progression while being treated with the investigational inhibitor adagrasib in clinical trials, investigators found multiple on-target KRAS alterations and off-target bypass mechanisms of acquired resistance to the drug.
“Diverse mechanisms confer resistance to the KRASG12C inhibitors, including secondary KRAS mutations, MAP [mitogen-activated protein] kinase pathway alterations, acquired genomic rearrangements, and histologic transformation,” he said.
Long follow-up
The long-term data reported at the 2022 meeting by Dr. Dy and colleagues included data on 48 patients enrolled in phase 1 of the trial, which had a primary endpoint of safety and tolerability, and 126 patients enrolled in phase 2, with a primary endpoint of objective response rate by blinded independent review.
The trial was conducted in centers in the United States, Europe, Australia, Japan, and South Korea.
Nearly all patients were pretreated: 92.5% of patients had received prior platinum-based chemotherapy and 90.2% had received anti–PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy.
Patients received oral sotorasib 960 mg once daily and were followed with radiographic scans every 6 weeks for the first year and once every 12 weeks thereafter.
Of the 174 patients enrolled, two were not evaluable for response at 2 years because of a lack of measurable lesions at baseline.
At a median follow-up of 24.9 months, 5 patients (2.9%) had a complete response and 65 (37.8%) had a partial response, for an objective response rate of 40.7%. An additional 74 patients (43%) had stable disease, for a disease control rate of 83.7%. Of the remaining patients, 23 (13.4%) had disease progression, and 5 were either not evaluable or had missing scan data.
Median progression-free survival was 6.3 months. Median time to response was 6 weeks, and median duration of response was 12.3 months. Half of patients who had a response retained that response for at least 12 months.
Median OS was 12.5 months. The 1-year and 2-year OS rates were 50.8% and 32.5%, respectively.
Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 21% of patients, and one patient had new-onset grade 3 hemolytic anemia 1 year after starting therapy. There were no treatment-related deaths and no treatment-related adverse events leading to discontinuation after the first year.
In exploratory analyses, the benefit of the drug was seen across tumors with varying levels of PD-L1 expression and the oncogenic STK11 comutation, and across KRASG12C variant allele frequency.
The investigators also reported that baseline circulating tumor DNA levels correlated with tumor burden, and that patients who had long-term benefits had lower baseline ctDNA. This finding is consistent with the documented role of ctDNA as a marker for poor prognosis regardless of therapy.
Dr. Dy reported receiving consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Mirati Therapeutics, and Takeda in the past 2 years. Dr. Yap disclosed receiving consulting fees from multiple companies. Dr. Awad disclosed consulting for multiple companies.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
AT AACR 2022
Black, senior patients more likely to get unneeded antibiotics
Black and senior patients are more likely to be overprescribed antibiotics, according to a new study of 7 billion trips to health care centers – findings that doctors say warrant a further look into unequal prescription practices.
Researchers at the University of Texas Health Science Center found that 64% of antibiotic prescriptions to Black patients and 74% of antibiotic prescriptions to patients aged 65 years and older were deemed inappropriate. White patients, meanwhile, received prescriptions that were deemed inappropriate 56% of the time.
Most of those prescriptions were written for conditions like nonbacterial skin problems, viral respiratory tract infections, and bronchitis – none of which can be treated with antibiotics.
The study – which used data from visits to U.S. doctors’ offices, hospitals, and EDs – will be presented at the 2022 European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases in Lisbon.
Researchers also found that 58% of antibiotic prescriptions to patients with a Hispanic or Latin American background were also not appropriate for use.
“Our results suggest that Black and [Hispanic/Latino] patients may be not be properly treated and are receiving antibiotic prescriptions even when not indicated,” researcher Eric Young, PharmD, said in a news release.
Doctors typically will prescribe an antibiotic if they fear a patient’s symptoms may lead to an infection, Dr. Young said. This is particularly true if the doctor believes a patient is unlikely to return for a follow-up, which, he says, “more frequently happens in minority populations.”
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that at least 30% of outpatient antibiotic prescriptions are not needed, and up to 50% of antibiotics prescribed are either unnecessary or the wrong type and/or dosage.
Overprescribing of antibiotics has long plagued the medical field. In 2015, the administration of then-President Barack Obama released a National Action Plan for Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria, with a goal to cut unneeded outpatient antibiotic use by at least half by 2020.
When antibiotics are overused, bacteria that infect us evolve to become stronger and defeat the drugs meant to save us.
Though the findings still need more study, at first glance they provide a concerning but unsurprising look at health inequities, said Rachel Villanueva, MD, president of the National Medical Association, the leading organization representing doctors and patients of African descent.
“We do know that these kind of inequities have existed for a long time in our society,” said Dr. Villanueva, a clinical assistant professor at the New York University. “They’re not new and have been well documented for many, many years. But this deserves further research and further evaluation.”
“This is just the first step – we need to do some more evaluation on how different communities are treated in the health care system. Why is this occurring?”
For patients 65 and older, it may be less about bias and more about having a hard time diagnosing certain conditions within that population, said Preeti Malani, MD, a professor of infectious diseases at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and director of the National Poll on Healthy Aging.
For example, she said, some older patients may have a harder time describing their symptoms. In some cases, doctors may give these patients a prescription to fill in case the issue does not clear up, because it could be harder for them to get back into the office.
“Sometimes it’s hard to know exactly what’s going on,” Dr. Malani said. “Something I’ve done in my own practice in the past is say, ‘I’m giving you a prescription, but I don’t want you to fill it yet.’”
Dr. Malani said inappropriately prescribing antibiotics can be especially dangerous for people 65 and older because of drug interactions and complications like Achilles tendon rupture and a Clostridioides difficile infection, which can arise after antibiotic use.
“We need more information on what drives this in older adults,” she said.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Black and senior patients are more likely to be overprescribed antibiotics, according to a new study of 7 billion trips to health care centers – findings that doctors say warrant a further look into unequal prescription practices.
Researchers at the University of Texas Health Science Center found that 64% of antibiotic prescriptions to Black patients and 74% of antibiotic prescriptions to patients aged 65 years and older were deemed inappropriate. White patients, meanwhile, received prescriptions that were deemed inappropriate 56% of the time.
Most of those prescriptions were written for conditions like nonbacterial skin problems, viral respiratory tract infections, and bronchitis – none of which can be treated with antibiotics.
The study – which used data from visits to U.S. doctors’ offices, hospitals, and EDs – will be presented at the 2022 European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases in Lisbon.
Researchers also found that 58% of antibiotic prescriptions to patients with a Hispanic or Latin American background were also not appropriate for use.
“Our results suggest that Black and [Hispanic/Latino] patients may be not be properly treated and are receiving antibiotic prescriptions even when not indicated,” researcher Eric Young, PharmD, said in a news release.
Doctors typically will prescribe an antibiotic if they fear a patient’s symptoms may lead to an infection, Dr. Young said. This is particularly true if the doctor believes a patient is unlikely to return for a follow-up, which, he says, “more frequently happens in minority populations.”
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that at least 30% of outpatient antibiotic prescriptions are not needed, and up to 50% of antibiotics prescribed are either unnecessary or the wrong type and/or dosage.
Overprescribing of antibiotics has long plagued the medical field. In 2015, the administration of then-President Barack Obama released a National Action Plan for Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria, with a goal to cut unneeded outpatient antibiotic use by at least half by 2020.
When antibiotics are overused, bacteria that infect us evolve to become stronger and defeat the drugs meant to save us.
Though the findings still need more study, at first glance they provide a concerning but unsurprising look at health inequities, said Rachel Villanueva, MD, president of the National Medical Association, the leading organization representing doctors and patients of African descent.
“We do know that these kind of inequities have existed for a long time in our society,” said Dr. Villanueva, a clinical assistant professor at the New York University. “They’re not new and have been well documented for many, many years. But this deserves further research and further evaluation.”
“This is just the first step – we need to do some more evaluation on how different communities are treated in the health care system. Why is this occurring?”
For patients 65 and older, it may be less about bias and more about having a hard time diagnosing certain conditions within that population, said Preeti Malani, MD, a professor of infectious diseases at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and director of the National Poll on Healthy Aging.
For example, she said, some older patients may have a harder time describing their symptoms. In some cases, doctors may give these patients a prescription to fill in case the issue does not clear up, because it could be harder for them to get back into the office.
“Sometimes it’s hard to know exactly what’s going on,” Dr. Malani said. “Something I’ve done in my own practice in the past is say, ‘I’m giving you a prescription, but I don’t want you to fill it yet.’”
Dr. Malani said inappropriately prescribing antibiotics can be especially dangerous for people 65 and older because of drug interactions and complications like Achilles tendon rupture and a Clostridioides difficile infection, which can arise after antibiotic use.
“We need more information on what drives this in older adults,” she said.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Black and senior patients are more likely to be overprescribed antibiotics, according to a new study of 7 billion trips to health care centers – findings that doctors say warrant a further look into unequal prescription practices.
Researchers at the University of Texas Health Science Center found that 64% of antibiotic prescriptions to Black patients and 74% of antibiotic prescriptions to patients aged 65 years and older were deemed inappropriate. White patients, meanwhile, received prescriptions that were deemed inappropriate 56% of the time.
Most of those prescriptions were written for conditions like nonbacterial skin problems, viral respiratory tract infections, and bronchitis – none of which can be treated with antibiotics.
The study – which used data from visits to U.S. doctors’ offices, hospitals, and EDs – will be presented at the 2022 European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases in Lisbon.
Researchers also found that 58% of antibiotic prescriptions to patients with a Hispanic or Latin American background were also not appropriate for use.
“Our results suggest that Black and [Hispanic/Latino] patients may be not be properly treated and are receiving antibiotic prescriptions even when not indicated,” researcher Eric Young, PharmD, said in a news release.
Doctors typically will prescribe an antibiotic if they fear a patient’s symptoms may lead to an infection, Dr. Young said. This is particularly true if the doctor believes a patient is unlikely to return for a follow-up, which, he says, “more frequently happens in minority populations.”
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that at least 30% of outpatient antibiotic prescriptions are not needed, and up to 50% of antibiotics prescribed are either unnecessary or the wrong type and/or dosage.
Overprescribing of antibiotics has long plagued the medical field. In 2015, the administration of then-President Barack Obama released a National Action Plan for Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria, with a goal to cut unneeded outpatient antibiotic use by at least half by 2020.
When antibiotics are overused, bacteria that infect us evolve to become stronger and defeat the drugs meant to save us.
Though the findings still need more study, at first glance they provide a concerning but unsurprising look at health inequities, said Rachel Villanueva, MD, president of the National Medical Association, the leading organization representing doctors and patients of African descent.
“We do know that these kind of inequities have existed for a long time in our society,” said Dr. Villanueva, a clinical assistant professor at the New York University. “They’re not new and have been well documented for many, many years. But this deserves further research and further evaluation.”
“This is just the first step – we need to do some more evaluation on how different communities are treated in the health care system. Why is this occurring?”
For patients 65 and older, it may be less about bias and more about having a hard time diagnosing certain conditions within that population, said Preeti Malani, MD, a professor of infectious diseases at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and director of the National Poll on Healthy Aging.
For example, she said, some older patients may have a harder time describing their symptoms. In some cases, doctors may give these patients a prescription to fill in case the issue does not clear up, because it could be harder for them to get back into the office.
“Sometimes it’s hard to know exactly what’s going on,” Dr. Malani said. “Something I’ve done in my own practice in the past is say, ‘I’m giving you a prescription, but I don’t want you to fill it yet.’”
Dr. Malani said inappropriately prescribing antibiotics can be especially dangerous for people 65 and older because of drug interactions and complications like Achilles tendon rupture and a Clostridioides difficile infection, which can arise after antibiotic use.
“We need more information on what drives this in older adults,” she said.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Deprived of sleep, many turn to melatonin despite risks
Can’t sleep? When slumber doesn’t come naturally, some are turning to melatonin, an over-the-counter sleep aid that often is mistaken for a supplement. This powerful hormone plays an important role in human biology, and specialists are questioning whether increasing levels could be doing more harm than good.
And while the health advisory checking the evidence is underway, the academy is recommending that melatonin not be used for insomnia in adults or children.
But what is insomnia, and how is it different from a few bad nights of sleep? Insomnia disturbs sleep at least three times a week for more than 3 months, often causing people to feel tired during the day as well.
Production of melatonin (dubbed the “vampire hormone”) begins at night, when it starts getting dark outside. Melatonin release is scheduled by the small but mighty pineal gland at the back of the head. Melatonin signals to the body that it’s time to sleep. And as the sun rises and light shines, melatonin levels decline again to help the body wake.
Sometimes packaged in gummy bear fruit flavors, melatonin can have an alluring appeal to sleep-deprived parents looking for relief for themselves and their children.
Muhammad Adeel Rishi, MD, vice chair of the public safety committee for the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, said he has a doctor colleague who started taking melatonin to help him during the pandemic when he was having trouble falling asleep at night. His doctor friend started giving the hormone to his own children, who were also having sleep issues.
But Dr. Rishi said there are important reasons to not use melatonin for insomnia until more information is available.
Melatonin affects sleep, but this hormone also influences other functions in the body. “It has an impact on body temperature, blood sugar, and even the tone of blood vessels,” Dr. Rishi said.
And because melatonin is available over the counter in the United States, it hasn’t been approved as a medicine under the Food and Drug Administration. A previous study of melatonin products, for instance, flagged problems with inconsistent doses, which make it hard for people to know exactly how much they are getting and prompted calls for more FDA oversight.
Imprecise doses
While melatonin doses typically range from 1 to 5 milligrams, bottles examined have been off target with much more or less hormone in the product than listed on the label.
Researchers from the University of Guelph (Ont.), tested 30 commercially available formulas and found the melatonin content varied from the ingredients labeled on the bottles by more than 10%. In addition to melatonin, the researchers found other substances in the bottles too: In about a quarter of the products, they also identified serotonin.
Impurities
While melatonin plays a role in setting the body’s biological clock and the sleep and wake cycle, serotonin is also at work. Occurring naturally in our bodies, serotonin is involved in mood and helps with deep REM sleep. But adding serotonin in unknown amounts could be unhealthy.
Dr. Rishi said it can be dangerous to use a product as a medication when doses can be so off and there are unknown byproducts in it.
Serotonin can influence the heart, blood vessels, and brain, so it’s not something Dr. Rishi wants to see people taking without paying attention. People taking medication for mood disorders could be especially affected by the serotonin in their sleep aid, he warns.
For anyone taking melatonin, Dr. Rishi recommended they check the bottle to see whether they are using a product with a USP-verified check mark, which indicates that the product meets the standards of the U.S. Pharmacopeia Convention.
The risk of impurities is a good reason for kids to not be given the hormone, but another worry is whether melatonin interferes with puberty in children – which is also a question researchers at the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario in Ottawa are asking.
Disrupting puberty
While short-term melatonin use is considered safe, the researchers reported, concerns that long-term use might delay children’s sexual maturation require more study. One theory is that nightly melatonin use might interrupt the decline of natural hormone levels and interfere with the start of puberty.
Researchers from the Children’s Hospital of Michigan in Detroit also reported an uptick in accidental ingestion of melatonin in children. Kids got their hands on melatonin and swallowed too many capsules more often than other pill-related mishaps during the pandemic.
Dr. Rishi said more research is needed to assess the safe use of melatonin in children. He points out that the hormone can treat circadian rhythm disorders in adults.
While specialists weigh the benefits and risks of melatonin use and where it is safest to try, Dr. Rishi said the hormone does have a role in medicine.
Melatonin will probably need to be regulated by the FDA as a medication – especially for children – Dr. Rishi pointed out. And what place, if any, it will have for managing chronic insomnia is “a big question mark.”
Results of the investigation by the American Academy of Sleep Medicine will be published on its sleepeducation.org website in a few months.
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
Can’t sleep? When slumber doesn’t come naturally, some are turning to melatonin, an over-the-counter sleep aid that often is mistaken for a supplement. This powerful hormone plays an important role in human biology, and specialists are questioning whether increasing levels could be doing more harm than good.
And while the health advisory checking the evidence is underway, the academy is recommending that melatonin not be used for insomnia in adults or children.
But what is insomnia, and how is it different from a few bad nights of sleep? Insomnia disturbs sleep at least three times a week for more than 3 months, often causing people to feel tired during the day as well.
Production of melatonin (dubbed the “vampire hormone”) begins at night, when it starts getting dark outside. Melatonin release is scheduled by the small but mighty pineal gland at the back of the head. Melatonin signals to the body that it’s time to sleep. And as the sun rises and light shines, melatonin levels decline again to help the body wake.
Sometimes packaged in gummy bear fruit flavors, melatonin can have an alluring appeal to sleep-deprived parents looking for relief for themselves and their children.
Muhammad Adeel Rishi, MD, vice chair of the public safety committee for the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, said he has a doctor colleague who started taking melatonin to help him during the pandemic when he was having trouble falling asleep at night. His doctor friend started giving the hormone to his own children, who were also having sleep issues.
But Dr. Rishi said there are important reasons to not use melatonin for insomnia until more information is available.
Melatonin affects sleep, but this hormone also influences other functions in the body. “It has an impact on body temperature, blood sugar, and even the tone of blood vessels,” Dr. Rishi said.
And because melatonin is available over the counter in the United States, it hasn’t been approved as a medicine under the Food and Drug Administration. A previous study of melatonin products, for instance, flagged problems with inconsistent doses, which make it hard for people to know exactly how much they are getting and prompted calls for more FDA oversight.
Imprecise doses
While melatonin doses typically range from 1 to 5 milligrams, bottles examined have been off target with much more or less hormone in the product than listed on the label.
Researchers from the University of Guelph (Ont.), tested 30 commercially available formulas and found the melatonin content varied from the ingredients labeled on the bottles by more than 10%. In addition to melatonin, the researchers found other substances in the bottles too: In about a quarter of the products, they also identified serotonin.
Impurities
While melatonin plays a role in setting the body’s biological clock and the sleep and wake cycle, serotonin is also at work. Occurring naturally in our bodies, serotonin is involved in mood and helps with deep REM sleep. But adding serotonin in unknown amounts could be unhealthy.
Dr. Rishi said it can be dangerous to use a product as a medication when doses can be so off and there are unknown byproducts in it.
Serotonin can influence the heart, blood vessels, and brain, so it’s not something Dr. Rishi wants to see people taking without paying attention. People taking medication for mood disorders could be especially affected by the serotonin in their sleep aid, he warns.
For anyone taking melatonin, Dr. Rishi recommended they check the bottle to see whether they are using a product with a USP-verified check mark, which indicates that the product meets the standards of the U.S. Pharmacopeia Convention.
The risk of impurities is a good reason for kids to not be given the hormone, but another worry is whether melatonin interferes with puberty in children – which is also a question researchers at the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario in Ottawa are asking.
Disrupting puberty
While short-term melatonin use is considered safe, the researchers reported, concerns that long-term use might delay children’s sexual maturation require more study. One theory is that nightly melatonin use might interrupt the decline of natural hormone levels and interfere with the start of puberty.
Researchers from the Children’s Hospital of Michigan in Detroit also reported an uptick in accidental ingestion of melatonin in children. Kids got their hands on melatonin and swallowed too many capsules more often than other pill-related mishaps during the pandemic.
Dr. Rishi said more research is needed to assess the safe use of melatonin in children. He points out that the hormone can treat circadian rhythm disorders in adults.
While specialists weigh the benefits and risks of melatonin use and where it is safest to try, Dr. Rishi said the hormone does have a role in medicine.
Melatonin will probably need to be regulated by the FDA as a medication – especially for children – Dr. Rishi pointed out. And what place, if any, it will have for managing chronic insomnia is “a big question mark.”
Results of the investigation by the American Academy of Sleep Medicine will be published on its sleepeducation.org website in a few months.
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
Can’t sleep? When slumber doesn’t come naturally, some are turning to melatonin, an over-the-counter sleep aid that often is mistaken for a supplement. This powerful hormone plays an important role in human biology, and specialists are questioning whether increasing levels could be doing more harm than good.
And while the health advisory checking the evidence is underway, the academy is recommending that melatonin not be used for insomnia in adults or children.
But what is insomnia, and how is it different from a few bad nights of sleep? Insomnia disturbs sleep at least three times a week for more than 3 months, often causing people to feel tired during the day as well.
Production of melatonin (dubbed the “vampire hormone”) begins at night, when it starts getting dark outside. Melatonin release is scheduled by the small but mighty pineal gland at the back of the head. Melatonin signals to the body that it’s time to sleep. And as the sun rises and light shines, melatonin levels decline again to help the body wake.
Sometimes packaged in gummy bear fruit flavors, melatonin can have an alluring appeal to sleep-deprived parents looking for relief for themselves and their children.
Muhammad Adeel Rishi, MD, vice chair of the public safety committee for the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, said he has a doctor colleague who started taking melatonin to help him during the pandemic when he was having trouble falling asleep at night. His doctor friend started giving the hormone to his own children, who were also having sleep issues.
But Dr. Rishi said there are important reasons to not use melatonin for insomnia until more information is available.
Melatonin affects sleep, but this hormone also influences other functions in the body. “It has an impact on body temperature, blood sugar, and even the tone of blood vessels,” Dr. Rishi said.
And because melatonin is available over the counter in the United States, it hasn’t been approved as a medicine under the Food and Drug Administration. A previous study of melatonin products, for instance, flagged problems with inconsistent doses, which make it hard for people to know exactly how much they are getting and prompted calls for more FDA oversight.
Imprecise doses
While melatonin doses typically range from 1 to 5 milligrams, bottles examined have been off target with much more or less hormone in the product than listed on the label.
Researchers from the University of Guelph (Ont.), tested 30 commercially available formulas and found the melatonin content varied from the ingredients labeled on the bottles by more than 10%. In addition to melatonin, the researchers found other substances in the bottles too: In about a quarter of the products, they also identified serotonin.
Impurities
While melatonin plays a role in setting the body’s biological clock and the sleep and wake cycle, serotonin is also at work. Occurring naturally in our bodies, serotonin is involved in mood and helps with deep REM sleep. But adding serotonin in unknown amounts could be unhealthy.
Dr. Rishi said it can be dangerous to use a product as a medication when doses can be so off and there are unknown byproducts in it.
Serotonin can influence the heart, blood vessels, and brain, so it’s not something Dr. Rishi wants to see people taking without paying attention. People taking medication for mood disorders could be especially affected by the serotonin in their sleep aid, he warns.
For anyone taking melatonin, Dr. Rishi recommended they check the bottle to see whether they are using a product with a USP-verified check mark, which indicates that the product meets the standards of the U.S. Pharmacopeia Convention.
The risk of impurities is a good reason for kids to not be given the hormone, but another worry is whether melatonin interferes with puberty in children – which is also a question researchers at the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario in Ottawa are asking.
Disrupting puberty
While short-term melatonin use is considered safe, the researchers reported, concerns that long-term use might delay children’s sexual maturation require more study. One theory is that nightly melatonin use might interrupt the decline of natural hormone levels and interfere with the start of puberty.
Researchers from the Children’s Hospital of Michigan in Detroit also reported an uptick in accidental ingestion of melatonin in children. Kids got their hands on melatonin and swallowed too many capsules more often than other pill-related mishaps during the pandemic.
Dr. Rishi said more research is needed to assess the safe use of melatonin in children. He points out that the hormone can treat circadian rhythm disorders in adults.
While specialists weigh the benefits and risks of melatonin use and where it is safest to try, Dr. Rishi said the hormone does have a role in medicine.
Melatonin will probably need to be regulated by the FDA as a medication – especially for children – Dr. Rishi pointed out. And what place, if any, it will have for managing chronic insomnia is “a big question mark.”
Results of the investigation by the American Academy of Sleep Medicine will be published on its sleepeducation.org website in a few months.
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
Can pickle juice help ease cirrhotic cramps?
In the trial, patients with cirrhotic cramps who sipped pickle brine at the onset of a muscle cramp saw a significant decrease in cramp severity relative to peers who sipped tap water when the cramp hit.
“The acid (vinegar) in the brine triggers a nerve reflex to stop the cramp when it hits the throat. This is why only a sip is needed,” lead investigator Elliot Tapper, MD, division of gastroenterology and hepatology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, told this news organization. The study was published online April 13 in American Journal of Gastroenterology.
Common and bothersome
Cramps are common in adults with cirrhosis, irrespective of disease severity. They can sometimes last for hours, and treatment options are limited.
In a prior study, 1 tablespoon of pickle juice rapidly stopped experimentally induced cramps.
“This is something that athletes use, and kidney doctors often recommend to their patients, so it is nothing unique to cirrhosis,” Dr. Tapper said.
The PICCLES trial involved 74 adults (mean age, 56.6 years) with at least 4 muscle cramps in the prior month. In the cohort, 54% were men, and 41% had ascites.
The median cramp frequency was 11-12 per month, with an average cramp severity of more than 4 out of 10 on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for cramps.
Some patients were receiving medications for their cramps at baseline, such as magnesium, potassium, baclofen, vitamin E, taurine, and gabapentin/pregabalin.
Thirty-eight patients were randomly allocated to sip pickle juice and 36 to sip tap water at the onset of a muscle cramp.
The proportion of cramps treated was similar in the pickle juice and tap water groups (77% and 72%). More patients in the pickle juice group said their cramps were aborted by the intervention (69% vs. 40%).
The primary outcome was the change in cramp severity at 28-days VAS for cramps. Cramps were assessed 10 times over 28 days using interactive text messages.
Pickle juice was associated with a larger average reduction in cramp severity than tap water (–2.25 points vs. –0.36 on the VAS-cramps), a difference that was statistically significant (P = .03).
There were no significant changes in the proportion of days with cramp severity of more than 5 on the VAS, or on sleep quality or health-related quality of life.
Because pickle juice contains sodium, the researchers also assessed weight change as a safety outcome. They found no significant differences in weight change between the two groups overall or in the subset with ascites.
Pickle juice is a “safe option that can stop painful cramps,” Dr. Tapper said in an interview, but was “disheartened” that it did not improve quality of life.
Dr. Tapper encourages patients with cramps to ask their doctor about pickle juice and doctors to ask their patients about muscle cramps.
“Awareness of a patient’s cramps is often lacking. Asking about cramps is not routine but could be the most important advance relating to this study,” he said.
While sips of pickle juice are “unlikely to cause harm,” Dr. Tapper said, he is “a little nervous about advising patients to address their complex needs alone. [Doctors] are there to think through the root causes and help make adjustments that could prevent the cramps in the first place,” he said.
Outside experts weigh in
This news organization reached out to several outside experts for their perspective on the study.
Nancy Reau, MD, professor of internal medicine, associate director of solid organ transplantation, and section chief of hepatology. Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, noted that interventions to manage and prevent muscle cramps are “important, as cramping is common in cirrhosis and strongly affects quality of life.”
Dr. Reau cautioned that while pickle juice “sounds benign, it does have a lot of salt. Despite the salt content, this study didn’t show any difference between patients with and without ascites.
“However, cramping is more common in our patients with sarcopenia and those on diuretics for fluid management and it would be easy to see how this might impact fluid management,” Dr. Reau noted.
“Given that it is the acid (not the salt) in the pickle juice, there might be low salt alternatives,” Dr. Reau said.
Echoing Dr. Reau, Ankur Shah, MD, division of kidney disease and hypertension, Brown University, Providence, R.I., noted that “overuse of pickle juice could place patients at risk of developing high blood pressure and fluid overload, and pickle juice should be included in the sodium restriction guidance given to patients with high blood pressure and heart failure.”
In this study, however, the individual dose consumed was low, Dr. Shah noted.
He said the study “elegantly provides evidence to support the practice of sipping pickle juice for cramping.”
The authors should be “applauded for studying a simple solution with the most rigorous of methodologies, a randomized controlled trial,” Dr. Shah added.
“This simple treatment may be helpful to patients far beyond those with just cirrhosis, and expect future studies to explore this treatment in other populations,” Dr. Shah said in an interview.
Paul Martin, MD, chief of the division of digestive health and liver diseases and Mandel Chair in Gastroenterology, University of Miami, noted that, while muscle cramps can have a major impact on quality of life, “in terms of some of the other complications of cirrhosis that health care providers are dealing with, they may seem relatively innocuous, but obviously patients have a slightly different interpretation because of the effect cramps can have on sleep and so on.
“There have been a variety of home remedies to treat muscle cramps, but this study is intriguing as it suggests that pickle juice, which is freely available, helps mitigate the severity of the cramps. However, it’s unclear whether it prevents cramps,” Dr. Martin said in an interview.
Given that the study is getting traction on Twitter, Dr. Martin encouraged health care providers to be aware of the study and prepared to answer questions from patients.
The study had no specific funding. Dr. Tapper has served as a consultant to Novartis, Axcella, and Allergan, has served on advisory boards for Mallinckrodt, Bausch Health, Kaleido, and Novo Nordisk, and has received unrestricted research grants from Gilead and Valeant. Dr. Reau, Dr. Shah, and Dr. Martin have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
In the trial, patients with cirrhotic cramps who sipped pickle brine at the onset of a muscle cramp saw a significant decrease in cramp severity relative to peers who sipped tap water when the cramp hit.
“The acid (vinegar) in the brine triggers a nerve reflex to stop the cramp when it hits the throat. This is why only a sip is needed,” lead investigator Elliot Tapper, MD, division of gastroenterology and hepatology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, told this news organization. The study was published online April 13 in American Journal of Gastroenterology.
Common and bothersome
Cramps are common in adults with cirrhosis, irrespective of disease severity. They can sometimes last for hours, and treatment options are limited.
In a prior study, 1 tablespoon of pickle juice rapidly stopped experimentally induced cramps.
“This is something that athletes use, and kidney doctors often recommend to their patients, so it is nothing unique to cirrhosis,” Dr. Tapper said.
The PICCLES trial involved 74 adults (mean age, 56.6 years) with at least 4 muscle cramps in the prior month. In the cohort, 54% were men, and 41% had ascites.
The median cramp frequency was 11-12 per month, with an average cramp severity of more than 4 out of 10 on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for cramps.
Some patients were receiving medications for their cramps at baseline, such as magnesium, potassium, baclofen, vitamin E, taurine, and gabapentin/pregabalin.
Thirty-eight patients were randomly allocated to sip pickle juice and 36 to sip tap water at the onset of a muscle cramp.
The proportion of cramps treated was similar in the pickle juice and tap water groups (77% and 72%). More patients in the pickle juice group said their cramps were aborted by the intervention (69% vs. 40%).
The primary outcome was the change in cramp severity at 28-days VAS for cramps. Cramps were assessed 10 times over 28 days using interactive text messages.
Pickle juice was associated with a larger average reduction in cramp severity than tap water (–2.25 points vs. –0.36 on the VAS-cramps), a difference that was statistically significant (P = .03).
There were no significant changes in the proportion of days with cramp severity of more than 5 on the VAS, or on sleep quality or health-related quality of life.
Because pickle juice contains sodium, the researchers also assessed weight change as a safety outcome. They found no significant differences in weight change between the two groups overall or in the subset with ascites.
Pickle juice is a “safe option that can stop painful cramps,” Dr. Tapper said in an interview, but was “disheartened” that it did not improve quality of life.
Dr. Tapper encourages patients with cramps to ask their doctor about pickle juice and doctors to ask their patients about muscle cramps.
“Awareness of a patient’s cramps is often lacking. Asking about cramps is not routine but could be the most important advance relating to this study,” he said.
While sips of pickle juice are “unlikely to cause harm,” Dr. Tapper said, he is “a little nervous about advising patients to address their complex needs alone. [Doctors] are there to think through the root causes and help make adjustments that could prevent the cramps in the first place,” he said.
Outside experts weigh in
This news organization reached out to several outside experts for their perspective on the study.
Nancy Reau, MD, professor of internal medicine, associate director of solid organ transplantation, and section chief of hepatology. Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, noted that interventions to manage and prevent muscle cramps are “important, as cramping is common in cirrhosis and strongly affects quality of life.”
Dr. Reau cautioned that while pickle juice “sounds benign, it does have a lot of salt. Despite the salt content, this study didn’t show any difference between patients with and without ascites.
“However, cramping is more common in our patients with sarcopenia and those on diuretics for fluid management and it would be easy to see how this might impact fluid management,” Dr. Reau noted.
“Given that it is the acid (not the salt) in the pickle juice, there might be low salt alternatives,” Dr. Reau said.
Echoing Dr. Reau, Ankur Shah, MD, division of kidney disease and hypertension, Brown University, Providence, R.I., noted that “overuse of pickle juice could place patients at risk of developing high blood pressure and fluid overload, and pickle juice should be included in the sodium restriction guidance given to patients with high blood pressure and heart failure.”
In this study, however, the individual dose consumed was low, Dr. Shah noted.
He said the study “elegantly provides evidence to support the practice of sipping pickle juice for cramping.”
The authors should be “applauded for studying a simple solution with the most rigorous of methodologies, a randomized controlled trial,” Dr. Shah added.
“This simple treatment may be helpful to patients far beyond those with just cirrhosis, and expect future studies to explore this treatment in other populations,” Dr. Shah said in an interview.
Paul Martin, MD, chief of the division of digestive health and liver diseases and Mandel Chair in Gastroenterology, University of Miami, noted that, while muscle cramps can have a major impact on quality of life, “in terms of some of the other complications of cirrhosis that health care providers are dealing with, they may seem relatively innocuous, but obviously patients have a slightly different interpretation because of the effect cramps can have on sleep and so on.
“There have been a variety of home remedies to treat muscle cramps, but this study is intriguing as it suggests that pickle juice, which is freely available, helps mitigate the severity of the cramps. However, it’s unclear whether it prevents cramps,” Dr. Martin said in an interview.
Given that the study is getting traction on Twitter, Dr. Martin encouraged health care providers to be aware of the study and prepared to answer questions from patients.
The study had no specific funding. Dr. Tapper has served as a consultant to Novartis, Axcella, and Allergan, has served on advisory boards for Mallinckrodt, Bausch Health, Kaleido, and Novo Nordisk, and has received unrestricted research grants from Gilead and Valeant. Dr. Reau, Dr. Shah, and Dr. Martin have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
In the trial, patients with cirrhotic cramps who sipped pickle brine at the onset of a muscle cramp saw a significant decrease in cramp severity relative to peers who sipped tap water when the cramp hit.
“The acid (vinegar) in the brine triggers a nerve reflex to stop the cramp when it hits the throat. This is why only a sip is needed,” lead investigator Elliot Tapper, MD, division of gastroenterology and hepatology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, told this news organization. The study was published online April 13 in American Journal of Gastroenterology.
Common and bothersome
Cramps are common in adults with cirrhosis, irrespective of disease severity. They can sometimes last for hours, and treatment options are limited.
In a prior study, 1 tablespoon of pickle juice rapidly stopped experimentally induced cramps.
“This is something that athletes use, and kidney doctors often recommend to their patients, so it is nothing unique to cirrhosis,” Dr. Tapper said.
The PICCLES trial involved 74 adults (mean age, 56.6 years) with at least 4 muscle cramps in the prior month. In the cohort, 54% were men, and 41% had ascites.
The median cramp frequency was 11-12 per month, with an average cramp severity of more than 4 out of 10 on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for cramps.
Some patients were receiving medications for their cramps at baseline, such as magnesium, potassium, baclofen, vitamin E, taurine, and gabapentin/pregabalin.
Thirty-eight patients were randomly allocated to sip pickle juice and 36 to sip tap water at the onset of a muscle cramp.
The proportion of cramps treated was similar in the pickle juice and tap water groups (77% and 72%). More patients in the pickle juice group said their cramps were aborted by the intervention (69% vs. 40%).
The primary outcome was the change in cramp severity at 28-days VAS for cramps. Cramps were assessed 10 times over 28 days using interactive text messages.
Pickle juice was associated with a larger average reduction in cramp severity than tap water (–2.25 points vs. –0.36 on the VAS-cramps), a difference that was statistically significant (P = .03).
There were no significant changes in the proportion of days with cramp severity of more than 5 on the VAS, or on sleep quality or health-related quality of life.
Because pickle juice contains sodium, the researchers also assessed weight change as a safety outcome. They found no significant differences in weight change between the two groups overall or in the subset with ascites.
Pickle juice is a “safe option that can stop painful cramps,” Dr. Tapper said in an interview, but was “disheartened” that it did not improve quality of life.
Dr. Tapper encourages patients with cramps to ask their doctor about pickle juice and doctors to ask their patients about muscle cramps.
“Awareness of a patient’s cramps is often lacking. Asking about cramps is not routine but could be the most important advance relating to this study,” he said.
While sips of pickle juice are “unlikely to cause harm,” Dr. Tapper said, he is “a little nervous about advising patients to address their complex needs alone. [Doctors] are there to think through the root causes and help make adjustments that could prevent the cramps in the first place,” he said.
Outside experts weigh in
This news organization reached out to several outside experts for their perspective on the study.
Nancy Reau, MD, professor of internal medicine, associate director of solid organ transplantation, and section chief of hepatology. Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, noted that interventions to manage and prevent muscle cramps are “important, as cramping is common in cirrhosis and strongly affects quality of life.”
Dr. Reau cautioned that while pickle juice “sounds benign, it does have a lot of salt. Despite the salt content, this study didn’t show any difference between patients with and without ascites.
“However, cramping is more common in our patients with sarcopenia and those on diuretics for fluid management and it would be easy to see how this might impact fluid management,” Dr. Reau noted.
“Given that it is the acid (not the salt) in the pickle juice, there might be low salt alternatives,” Dr. Reau said.
Echoing Dr. Reau, Ankur Shah, MD, division of kidney disease and hypertension, Brown University, Providence, R.I., noted that “overuse of pickle juice could place patients at risk of developing high blood pressure and fluid overload, and pickle juice should be included in the sodium restriction guidance given to patients with high blood pressure and heart failure.”
In this study, however, the individual dose consumed was low, Dr. Shah noted.
He said the study “elegantly provides evidence to support the practice of sipping pickle juice for cramping.”
The authors should be “applauded for studying a simple solution with the most rigorous of methodologies, a randomized controlled trial,” Dr. Shah added.
“This simple treatment may be helpful to patients far beyond those with just cirrhosis, and expect future studies to explore this treatment in other populations,” Dr. Shah said in an interview.
Paul Martin, MD, chief of the division of digestive health and liver diseases and Mandel Chair in Gastroenterology, University of Miami, noted that, while muscle cramps can have a major impact on quality of life, “in terms of some of the other complications of cirrhosis that health care providers are dealing with, they may seem relatively innocuous, but obviously patients have a slightly different interpretation because of the effect cramps can have on sleep and so on.
“There have been a variety of home remedies to treat muscle cramps, but this study is intriguing as it suggests that pickle juice, which is freely available, helps mitigate the severity of the cramps. However, it’s unclear whether it prevents cramps,” Dr. Martin said in an interview.
Given that the study is getting traction on Twitter, Dr. Martin encouraged health care providers to be aware of the study and prepared to answer questions from patients.
The study had no specific funding. Dr. Tapper has served as a consultant to Novartis, Axcella, and Allergan, has served on advisory boards for Mallinckrodt, Bausch Health, Kaleido, and Novo Nordisk, and has received unrestricted research grants from Gilead and Valeant. Dr. Reau, Dr. Shah, and Dr. Martin have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Assay-guided chemo in recurrent glioma linked to longer survival
New research suggests that chemotherapy treatments for recurrent high-grade gliomas indicated by an assay-guided tool called ChemoID can boost median survival, compared with physician choice.
The randomized, phase 3 trial results were presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research.
Over a median follow-up of 9 months, median overall survival in the ChemoID group was 12.5 months (95% confidence interval, 10.2-14.7), compared with 9 months (95% CI, 4.2-13.8) in the group whose treatments were chosen by physicians (P = .010).
“While the prognosis is very dismal, we’re still providing a 3.5-month benefit in the guided arm versus physician choice,” said study coauthor Jagan Valluri, PhD, professor of cellular biology and integrative medicine at Marshall University, Huntington, W. Va.
As Dr. Valluri noted, patients with recurrent high-grade gliomas typically have failed radiation and are left with poor prognoses. Fewer than one in four patients respond to chemotherapy at this point, he said, and the response is inconsistent from patient to patient.
“We developed ChemoID since cancer is very unique,” he said, “and any kind of chemotherapy should be tailored to each individual patient on a case-by-case basis.”
The ChemoID tool, a proprietary assay, tests the response of patient cells to various chemotherapy treatments. A test costs $3,500, and some insurers cover it, Dr. Valluri said.
For the new study, researchers randomly assigned 50 patients with grade III/IV recurrent glioma to be treated with chemotherapy chosen by physicians or chemotherapy recommended by the ChemoID tool.
Risk of death in the ChemoID group was lower than in the physician-guided group (hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.24-0.81; P = .008), and median progression-free survival was higher in the ChemoID group (10.1 months vs. 3.5 months; 95% CI, 4.8-15.4 vs. 1.9-5.1; HR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.14-0.44; P < .001).
“We want the treating physician to have actionable tools in front of them before they treat the patient,” Dr. Valluri said. “We want this assay to become mainstream and part of the standard care workup.”
The study is funded by Cordgenics, where Dr. Valluri serves as chief operating officer.
New research suggests that chemotherapy treatments for recurrent high-grade gliomas indicated by an assay-guided tool called ChemoID can boost median survival, compared with physician choice.
The randomized, phase 3 trial results were presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research.
Over a median follow-up of 9 months, median overall survival in the ChemoID group was 12.5 months (95% confidence interval, 10.2-14.7), compared with 9 months (95% CI, 4.2-13.8) in the group whose treatments were chosen by physicians (P = .010).
“While the prognosis is very dismal, we’re still providing a 3.5-month benefit in the guided arm versus physician choice,” said study coauthor Jagan Valluri, PhD, professor of cellular biology and integrative medicine at Marshall University, Huntington, W. Va.
As Dr. Valluri noted, patients with recurrent high-grade gliomas typically have failed radiation and are left with poor prognoses. Fewer than one in four patients respond to chemotherapy at this point, he said, and the response is inconsistent from patient to patient.
“We developed ChemoID since cancer is very unique,” he said, “and any kind of chemotherapy should be tailored to each individual patient on a case-by-case basis.”
The ChemoID tool, a proprietary assay, tests the response of patient cells to various chemotherapy treatments. A test costs $3,500, and some insurers cover it, Dr. Valluri said.
For the new study, researchers randomly assigned 50 patients with grade III/IV recurrent glioma to be treated with chemotherapy chosen by physicians or chemotherapy recommended by the ChemoID tool.
Risk of death in the ChemoID group was lower than in the physician-guided group (hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.24-0.81; P = .008), and median progression-free survival was higher in the ChemoID group (10.1 months vs. 3.5 months; 95% CI, 4.8-15.4 vs. 1.9-5.1; HR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.14-0.44; P < .001).
“We want the treating physician to have actionable tools in front of them before they treat the patient,” Dr. Valluri said. “We want this assay to become mainstream and part of the standard care workup.”
The study is funded by Cordgenics, where Dr. Valluri serves as chief operating officer.
New research suggests that chemotherapy treatments for recurrent high-grade gliomas indicated by an assay-guided tool called ChemoID can boost median survival, compared with physician choice.
The randomized, phase 3 trial results were presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research.
Over a median follow-up of 9 months, median overall survival in the ChemoID group was 12.5 months (95% confidence interval, 10.2-14.7), compared with 9 months (95% CI, 4.2-13.8) in the group whose treatments were chosen by physicians (P = .010).
“While the prognosis is very dismal, we’re still providing a 3.5-month benefit in the guided arm versus physician choice,” said study coauthor Jagan Valluri, PhD, professor of cellular biology and integrative medicine at Marshall University, Huntington, W. Va.
As Dr. Valluri noted, patients with recurrent high-grade gliomas typically have failed radiation and are left with poor prognoses. Fewer than one in four patients respond to chemotherapy at this point, he said, and the response is inconsistent from patient to patient.
“We developed ChemoID since cancer is very unique,” he said, “and any kind of chemotherapy should be tailored to each individual patient on a case-by-case basis.”
The ChemoID tool, a proprietary assay, tests the response of patient cells to various chemotherapy treatments. A test costs $3,500, and some insurers cover it, Dr. Valluri said.
For the new study, researchers randomly assigned 50 patients with grade III/IV recurrent glioma to be treated with chemotherapy chosen by physicians or chemotherapy recommended by the ChemoID tool.
Risk of death in the ChemoID group was lower than in the physician-guided group (hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.24-0.81; P = .008), and median progression-free survival was higher in the ChemoID group (10.1 months vs. 3.5 months; 95% CI, 4.8-15.4 vs. 1.9-5.1; HR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.14-0.44; P < .001).
“We want the treating physician to have actionable tools in front of them before they treat the patient,” Dr. Valluri said. “We want this assay to become mainstream and part of the standard care workup.”
The study is funded by Cordgenics, where Dr. Valluri serves as chief operating officer.
FROM AACR 2022
Aspirin exposure fails to reduce cardiovascular event risk
The benefits of aspirin use for the primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) have been questioned in light of data showing neutral outcomes in low-risk patients and concerns about increased bleeding risk and mortality in healthy older adults, wrote Rita Del Pinto, MD, of University of L’Aquila (Italy) and colleagues in JAMA Network Open.
In the study, Dr. Del Pinto and colleagues conducted a post hoc analysis of data from more than 2,500 participants in SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), a multicenter, randomized trial conducted from 2010 to 2013.
The goal of SPRINT was to compare intensive and standard blood pressure–lowering strategies for hypertension patients. The primary outcome of the current study was risk of a first cardiovascular event, which included adjudicated myocardial infarction, non–myocardial infarction acute coronary syndrome, stroke, acute heart failure, and CVD death.“There has been considerable improvement in the management of cardiovascular risk factors since the first reports on aspirin use for cardiovascular prevention,” Dr. Del Pinto said in an interview.
“As for hypertension, not only have more effective antihypertensive medications become available, but also evidence has recently emerged in support of a downwards redefinition of blood pressure targets during treatment,” she said. “In this context, in an era when great attention is paid to the personalization of treatment, no specific studies had addressed the association of aspirin use as a primary prevention strategy in a cohort of relatively old, high-risk individuals with treated systolic blood pressure steadily below the recommended target,” she added.
The researchers assessed whether aspirin use in addition to standard blood pressure management (a target of less than 140 mm Hg) decreased risk and improved survival.
The study population included 2,664 adult patients; 29.3% were women, and 24.5% were aged 75 years and older. Half of the patients (1,332) received aspirin and 1,332 did not.
In a multivariate analysis, 42 cardiovascular events occurred in the aspirin group, compared with 20 events in those not exposed to aspirin (hazard ratio, 2.30). The findings were consistent in subgroup analyses of younger individuals, current and former smokers, and patients on statins.
An additional subgroup analysis of individuals randomized to standard care or intensive care in the SPRINT study showed no significant difference in primary outcome rates between individuals who received aspirin and those who did not. The rates for aspirin use vs. non–aspirin use were 5.85% vs. 3.60% in the standard treatment group and 4.66% vs. 2.56% in the intensive treatment group.
The study findings were limited by several factors, including the post hoc design, short follow-up period, and lack of data on the initiation of aspirin and bleeding events, the researchers wrote. However, the results suggest that modern management of hypertension may have redefined the potential benefits of aspirin in patients with hypertension, they concluded.
Findings confirm value of preventive care
“The study was conducted as a post-hoc analysis on an experimental cohort, which must be considered when interpreting the results,” Dr. Del Pinto said.
Despite the limitations, the study findings affirm that effective treatment of major cardiovascular risk factors, such as hypertension, with proven drugs is “a mainstay of the primary prevention of ASCVD,” she emphasized.
As for additional research, “Testing our findings in a dedicated setting with sufficiently long follow-up, where aspirin dose and indication, as well as any possible bleeding event, are reported could expand the clinical meaning of our observations,” said Dr. Del Pinto. “Also, the clinical impact of aspirin, even in combination with novel cardiovascular drugs such as direct oral anticoagulants, in populations exposed to combinations of risk factors, deserves further investigation.”
Data support shared decision-making
“While recent evidence has not shown a benefit of aspirin in the primary prevention of ASCVD in several populations, the subpopulation of patients with hypertension as an ASCVD risk factor is also of interest to the clinician,” Suman Pal, MD, of the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, said in an interview. “The lack of benefit of aspirin in this study, despite its limitations, was surprising, and I would be eager to see how the role of aspirin in ASCVD prevention would continue to evolve in conjunction with improvement in other therapies for modification of risk factors.”
“The decision to continue aspirin in this subgroup of patients should warrant a discussion with patients and a reexamination of risks and benefits until further data are available,” Dr. Pal emphasized.
Larger studies with long-term follow-ups would be required to further clarify the role of aspirin in primary prevention of ASCVD in patients with hypertension without diabetes or chronic kidney disease, he added.
Data were supplied courtesy of BioLINCC. The study received no outside funding. The researchers and Dr. Pal had no financial conflicts to disclose.
The benefits of aspirin use for the primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) have been questioned in light of data showing neutral outcomes in low-risk patients and concerns about increased bleeding risk and mortality in healthy older adults, wrote Rita Del Pinto, MD, of University of L’Aquila (Italy) and colleagues in JAMA Network Open.
In the study, Dr. Del Pinto and colleagues conducted a post hoc analysis of data from more than 2,500 participants in SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), a multicenter, randomized trial conducted from 2010 to 2013.
The goal of SPRINT was to compare intensive and standard blood pressure–lowering strategies for hypertension patients. The primary outcome of the current study was risk of a first cardiovascular event, which included adjudicated myocardial infarction, non–myocardial infarction acute coronary syndrome, stroke, acute heart failure, and CVD death.“There has been considerable improvement in the management of cardiovascular risk factors since the first reports on aspirin use for cardiovascular prevention,” Dr. Del Pinto said in an interview.
“As for hypertension, not only have more effective antihypertensive medications become available, but also evidence has recently emerged in support of a downwards redefinition of blood pressure targets during treatment,” she said. “In this context, in an era when great attention is paid to the personalization of treatment, no specific studies had addressed the association of aspirin use as a primary prevention strategy in a cohort of relatively old, high-risk individuals with treated systolic blood pressure steadily below the recommended target,” she added.
The researchers assessed whether aspirin use in addition to standard blood pressure management (a target of less than 140 mm Hg) decreased risk and improved survival.
The study population included 2,664 adult patients; 29.3% were women, and 24.5% were aged 75 years and older. Half of the patients (1,332) received aspirin and 1,332 did not.
In a multivariate analysis, 42 cardiovascular events occurred in the aspirin group, compared with 20 events in those not exposed to aspirin (hazard ratio, 2.30). The findings were consistent in subgroup analyses of younger individuals, current and former smokers, and patients on statins.
An additional subgroup analysis of individuals randomized to standard care or intensive care in the SPRINT study showed no significant difference in primary outcome rates between individuals who received aspirin and those who did not. The rates for aspirin use vs. non–aspirin use were 5.85% vs. 3.60% in the standard treatment group and 4.66% vs. 2.56% in the intensive treatment group.
The study findings were limited by several factors, including the post hoc design, short follow-up period, and lack of data on the initiation of aspirin and bleeding events, the researchers wrote. However, the results suggest that modern management of hypertension may have redefined the potential benefits of aspirin in patients with hypertension, they concluded.
Findings confirm value of preventive care
“The study was conducted as a post-hoc analysis on an experimental cohort, which must be considered when interpreting the results,” Dr. Del Pinto said.
Despite the limitations, the study findings affirm that effective treatment of major cardiovascular risk factors, such as hypertension, with proven drugs is “a mainstay of the primary prevention of ASCVD,” she emphasized.
As for additional research, “Testing our findings in a dedicated setting with sufficiently long follow-up, where aspirin dose and indication, as well as any possible bleeding event, are reported could expand the clinical meaning of our observations,” said Dr. Del Pinto. “Also, the clinical impact of aspirin, even in combination with novel cardiovascular drugs such as direct oral anticoagulants, in populations exposed to combinations of risk factors, deserves further investigation.”
Data support shared decision-making
“While recent evidence has not shown a benefit of aspirin in the primary prevention of ASCVD in several populations, the subpopulation of patients with hypertension as an ASCVD risk factor is also of interest to the clinician,” Suman Pal, MD, of the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, said in an interview. “The lack of benefit of aspirin in this study, despite its limitations, was surprising, and I would be eager to see how the role of aspirin in ASCVD prevention would continue to evolve in conjunction with improvement in other therapies for modification of risk factors.”
“The decision to continue aspirin in this subgroup of patients should warrant a discussion with patients and a reexamination of risks and benefits until further data are available,” Dr. Pal emphasized.
Larger studies with long-term follow-ups would be required to further clarify the role of aspirin in primary prevention of ASCVD in patients with hypertension without diabetes or chronic kidney disease, he added.
Data were supplied courtesy of BioLINCC. The study received no outside funding. The researchers and Dr. Pal had no financial conflicts to disclose.
The benefits of aspirin use for the primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) have been questioned in light of data showing neutral outcomes in low-risk patients and concerns about increased bleeding risk and mortality in healthy older adults, wrote Rita Del Pinto, MD, of University of L’Aquila (Italy) and colleagues in JAMA Network Open.
In the study, Dr. Del Pinto and colleagues conducted a post hoc analysis of data from more than 2,500 participants in SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), a multicenter, randomized trial conducted from 2010 to 2013.
The goal of SPRINT was to compare intensive and standard blood pressure–lowering strategies for hypertension patients. The primary outcome of the current study was risk of a first cardiovascular event, which included adjudicated myocardial infarction, non–myocardial infarction acute coronary syndrome, stroke, acute heart failure, and CVD death.“There has been considerable improvement in the management of cardiovascular risk factors since the first reports on aspirin use for cardiovascular prevention,” Dr. Del Pinto said in an interview.
“As for hypertension, not only have more effective antihypertensive medications become available, but also evidence has recently emerged in support of a downwards redefinition of blood pressure targets during treatment,” she said. “In this context, in an era when great attention is paid to the personalization of treatment, no specific studies had addressed the association of aspirin use as a primary prevention strategy in a cohort of relatively old, high-risk individuals with treated systolic blood pressure steadily below the recommended target,” she added.
The researchers assessed whether aspirin use in addition to standard blood pressure management (a target of less than 140 mm Hg) decreased risk and improved survival.
The study population included 2,664 adult patients; 29.3% were women, and 24.5% were aged 75 years and older. Half of the patients (1,332) received aspirin and 1,332 did not.
In a multivariate analysis, 42 cardiovascular events occurred in the aspirin group, compared with 20 events in those not exposed to aspirin (hazard ratio, 2.30). The findings were consistent in subgroup analyses of younger individuals, current and former smokers, and patients on statins.
An additional subgroup analysis of individuals randomized to standard care or intensive care in the SPRINT study showed no significant difference in primary outcome rates between individuals who received aspirin and those who did not. The rates for aspirin use vs. non–aspirin use were 5.85% vs. 3.60% in the standard treatment group and 4.66% vs. 2.56% in the intensive treatment group.
The study findings were limited by several factors, including the post hoc design, short follow-up period, and lack of data on the initiation of aspirin and bleeding events, the researchers wrote. However, the results suggest that modern management of hypertension may have redefined the potential benefits of aspirin in patients with hypertension, they concluded.
Findings confirm value of preventive care
“The study was conducted as a post-hoc analysis on an experimental cohort, which must be considered when interpreting the results,” Dr. Del Pinto said.
Despite the limitations, the study findings affirm that effective treatment of major cardiovascular risk factors, such as hypertension, with proven drugs is “a mainstay of the primary prevention of ASCVD,” she emphasized.
As for additional research, “Testing our findings in a dedicated setting with sufficiently long follow-up, where aspirin dose and indication, as well as any possible bleeding event, are reported could expand the clinical meaning of our observations,” said Dr. Del Pinto. “Also, the clinical impact of aspirin, even in combination with novel cardiovascular drugs such as direct oral anticoagulants, in populations exposed to combinations of risk factors, deserves further investigation.”
Data support shared decision-making
“While recent evidence has not shown a benefit of aspirin in the primary prevention of ASCVD in several populations, the subpopulation of patients with hypertension as an ASCVD risk factor is also of interest to the clinician,” Suman Pal, MD, of the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, said in an interview. “The lack of benefit of aspirin in this study, despite its limitations, was surprising, and I would be eager to see how the role of aspirin in ASCVD prevention would continue to evolve in conjunction with improvement in other therapies for modification of risk factors.”
“The decision to continue aspirin in this subgroup of patients should warrant a discussion with patients and a reexamination of risks and benefits until further data are available,” Dr. Pal emphasized.
Larger studies with long-term follow-ups would be required to further clarify the role of aspirin in primary prevention of ASCVD in patients with hypertension without diabetes or chronic kidney disease, he added.
Data were supplied courtesy of BioLINCC. The study received no outside funding. The researchers and Dr. Pal had no financial conflicts to disclose.
FROM JAMA NETWORK OPEN
Combo of SGLT2 inhibitor + GLP-1 RA boosts diabetes survival
WASHINGTON – Patients with type 2 diabetes and established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease treated with both an sodium-glucose transporter 2 inhibitor and a glucagonlike peptide–1 receptor agonist had a significant 80% cut in their rate of all-cause death during 1-year follow-up, compared with matched patients treated with an agent from either class alone in an observational, retrospective study of more than 15,000 people in the U.S. Veterans Affairs health system.
For the study’s primary endpoint, the combined rate of all-cause death, nonfatal MI, or nonfatal stroke, combined treatment with both an agent from the sodium-glucose transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor class and from the glucagonlike peptide–1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) class linked with a significant, roughly 50% cut in events during 1-year follow-up, compared with patients treated with an agent from just one of these two classes, Persio D. Lopez, MD, reported at the annual scientific sessions of the American College of Cardiology.
This improvement in the combined endpoint outcome resulted entirely from reduced all-cause mortality. Dual treatment showed no significant association with the incidence of nonfatal MIs or strokes, compared with monotherapy, with rates that were nearly identical regardless of whether patients took one of the agents or both, said Dr. Lopez, a cardiologist at Mount Sinai Morningside and the James J. Peters VA Medical Center, both in New York.
Combining classes for hard-to-control diabetes
“We’re not sure what drives combined use” of agents from both drug classes in these types of patients, admitted Dr. Lopez during his talk. “Our hypothesis is that dual treatment is used in patients with harder-to-control diabetes.”
Salim S. Virani, MD, PhD, who practices in the VA system but was not involved with the study, agreed that this is the likely explanation for most instances of high-risk VA patients with diabetes who receive agents from both classes.
“I have a few patients” on both classes, usually “patients with higher starting A1c levels who need greater glycemic control,” said Dr. Virani, professor of medicine at Baylor College of Medicine and a cardiologist at the Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, both in Houston.
U.S. use of either drug class, let alone both, in patients with type 2 diabetes is still struggling to gain traction in U.S. practice and remains limited to a minority of these patients, a prescribing pattern reflected in recent VA data. Analysis of more than half a million patients in the VA system with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) who received treatment at any of 130 VA medical centers throughout 2020 showed that 11% had received an SGLT2 inhibitor, and 8% a GLP-1 RA.
The most frequently used antidiabetes drug classes in these patients were insulin in 36%, biguanides in 47%, and sulfonylureas in 22%.
These data also showed a striking level of variability among the 130 VA centers, with some of the sites prescribing either an SGLT2 inhibitor or a GLP-1 RA to as few as about 3% each of these patients, while other centers had a roughly 10-fold higher prescription rate for each of about 25%-30% of their patients with type 2 diabetes and ASCVD.
Despite the overall modest level of use of both classes in these types of patients as recently as 2020, no barriers exist at the VA to prescribing an agent from one or both classes “if you provide a good reason” for a patient to receive the drugs, Dr. Virani said in an interview. He also predicted that use of both classes in these patients, including combination treatment, will likely soon expand.
‘A lot of interest’ in combining an SGLT2 inhibitor and a GLP-1 RA
“There will be a lot of interest in combing the two classes. It makes intuitive sense [to treat with both classes] because most patients with diabetes need more than one drug” for glycemic control, he noted. “Why not use two classes that each reduce a patient’s risk” for adverse outcomes involving ASCVD, heart failure, and renal dysfunction, added Dr. Virani.
The study run by Dr. Lopez and his associates used data collected in the National VA Database and included 121,156 patients with both type 2 diabetes and established ASCVD. Using propensity-score matching the researchers compiled three subgroups that each included 5,277 matched patients. One subgroup had patients prescribed an SGLT2 inhibitor, a second subgroup included patients on a GLP-1 RA, and a third subgroup had patients on agents from both classes. Patient matching relied on age, sex, left ventricular ejection fraction, hemoglobin A1c level, systolic blood pressure, and the presence of coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease.
Patients included in the analysis averaged about 67 years of age; 97% were men, their average body mass index was about 34 kg/m2, their average A1c was about 7.9%, their average estimated glomerular filtration rate was about 55-66 mL/min per 1.73 m2, and their average left ventricular ejection fraction was about 55%. The database provided a median follow-up of 902 days (about 2.5 years). The prespecified primary endpoint focused on events that occurred during the first year of follow-up, but the investigators also ran a 3-year follow-up analysis on a post hoc basis.
The most common SGLT2 inhibitor received by these patients was empagliflozin (Jardiance), used on virtually everyone who received an agent from this class. In contrast, the GLP-1 RA drugs that patients received split more widely. The most prescribed agent was liraglutide (Victoza), followed by semaglutide (Ozempic), and dulaglutide (Trulicity), with fewer than 5% receiving exenatide (Bydureon, Byetta).
Regarding other treatments, about 97% of all patients received a statin, about 94% were on a renin-angiotensin system inhibitor, about 90% were on metformin, and roughly 75% were on insulin, aspirin, and a beta-blocker, with smaller numbers on other types of agents.
For the study’s primary endpoint, the 1-year incidence of combined ASCVD events including all-cause death, patients on agents from both classes had a significant 46% reduced rate compared with those on an SGLT2 inhibitor only, and a significant 49% reduced rate, compared with those on a GLP-1 RA only. These between-group separations broadened slightly during 3-year follow-up. Dr. Lopez did not report results of a direct comparison between patients on just an SGLT2 inhibitor and those on just a GLP-1 RA.
For the endpoint of all-cause death, those on combined treatment had a 1-year rate that was 83% below the rate among patients on only an SGLT2 inhibitor, and 81% below the rate among patients who received a GLP-1 RA but not the other class.
Dr. Lopez cautioned that selection bias could have influenced the outcomes of patients who received both classes rather than one or the other, and he also highlighted that the analysis relied on administrative data rather than information gleaned from more detailed medical records or prospectively collected findings and was limited by only including a very small number of women.
“Our results need to be validated in prospective studies,” he declared.
Dr. Lopez and Dr. Virani had no commercial disclosures.
WASHINGTON – Patients with type 2 diabetes and established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease treated with both an sodium-glucose transporter 2 inhibitor and a glucagonlike peptide–1 receptor agonist had a significant 80% cut in their rate of all-cause death during 1-year follow-up, compared with matched patients treated with an agent from either class alone in an observational, retrospective study of more than 15,000 people in the U.S. Veterans Affairs health system.
For the study’s primary endpoint, the combined rate of all-cause death, nonfatal MI, or nonfatal stroke, combined treatment with both an agent from the sodium-glucose transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor class and from the glucagonlike peptide–1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) class linked with a significant, roughly 50% cut in events during 1-year follow-up, compared with patients treated with an agent from just one of these two classes, Persio D. Lopez, MD, reported at the annual scientific sessions of the American College of Cardiology.
This improvement in the combined endpoint outcome resulted entirely from reduced all-cause mortality. Dual treatment showed no significant association with the incidence of nonfatal MIs or strokes, compared with monotherapy, with rates that were nearly identical regardless of whether patients took one of the agents or both, said Dr. Lopez, a cardiologist at Mount Sinai Morningside and the James J. Peters VA Medical Center, both in New York.
Combining classes for hard-to-control diabetes
“We’re not sure what drives combined use” of agents from both drug classes in these types of patients, admitted Dr. Lopez during his talk. “Our hypothesis is that dual treatment is used in patients with harder-to-control diabetes.”
Salim S. Virani, MD, PhD, who practices in the VA system but was not involved with the study, agreed that this is the likely explanation for most instances of high-risk VA patients with diabetes who receive agents from both classes.
“I have a few patients” on both classes, usually “patients with higher starting A1c levels who need greater glycemic control,” said Dr. Virani, professor of medicine at Baylor College of Medicine and a cardiologist at the Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, both in Houston.
U.S. use of either drug class, let alone both, in patients with type 2 diabetes is still struggling to gain traction in U.S. practice and remains limited to a minority of these patients, a prescribing pattern reflected in recent VA data. Analysis of more than half a million patients in the VA system with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) who received treatment at any of 130 VA medical centers throughout 2020 showed that 11% had received an SGLT2 inhibitor, and 8% a GLP-1 RA.
The most frequently used antidiabetes drug classes in these patients were insulin in 36%, biguanides in 47%, and sulfonylureas in 22%.
These data also showed a striking level of variability among the 130 VA centers, with some of the sites prescribing either an SGLT2 inhibitor or a GLP-1 RA to as few as about 3% each of these patients, while other centers had a roughly 10-fold higher prescription rate for each of about 25%-30% of their patients with type 2 diabetes and ASCVD.
Despite the overall modest level of use of both classes in these types of patients as recently as 2020, no barriers exist at the VA to prescribing an agent from one or both classes “if you provide a good reason” for a patient to receive the drugs, Dr. Virani said in an interview. He also predicted that use of both classes in these patients, including combination treatment, will likely soon expand.
‘A lot of interest’ in combining an SGLT2 inhibitor and a GLP-1 RA
“There will be a lot of interest in combing the two classes. It makes intuitive sense [to treat with both classes] because most patients with diabetes need more than one drug” for glycemic control, he noted. “Why not use two classes that each reduce a patient’s risk” for adverse outcomes involving ASCVD, heart failure, and renal dysfunction, added Dr. Virani.
The study run by Dr. Lopez and his associates used data collected in the National VA Database and included 121,156 patients with both type 2 diabetes and established ASCVD. Using propensity-score matching the researchers compiled three subgroups that each included 5,277 matched patients. One subgroup had patients prescribed an SGLT2 inhibitor, a second subgroup included patients on a GLP-1 RA, and a third subgroup had patients on agents from both classes. Patient matching relied on age, sex, left ventricular ejection fraction, hemoglobin A1c level, systolic blood pressure, and the presence of coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease.
Patients included in the analysis averaged about 67 years of age; 97% were men, their average body mass index was about 34 kg/m2, their average A1c was about 7.9%, their average estimated glomerular filtration rate was about 55-66 mL/min per 1.73 m2, and their average left ventricular ejection fraction was about 55%. The database provided a median follow-up of 902 days (about 2.5 years). The prespecified primary endpoint focused on events that occurred during the first year of follow-up, but the investigators also ran a 3-year follow-up analysis on a post hoc basis.
The most common SGLT2 inhibitor received by these patients was empagliflozin (Jardiance), used on virtually everyone who received an agent from this class. In contrast, the GLP-1 RA drugs that patients received split more widely. The most prescribed agent was liraglutide (Victoza), followed by semaglutide (Ozempic), and dulaglutide (Trulicity), with fewer than 5% receiving exenatide (Bydureon, Byetta).
Regarding other treatments, about 97% of all patients received a statin, about 94% were on a renin-angiotensin system inhibitor, about 90% were on metformin, and roughly 75% were on insulin, aspirin, and a beta-blocker, with smaller numbers on other types of agents.
For the study’s primary endpoint, the 1-year incidence of combined ASCVD events including all-cause death, patients on agents from both classes had a significant 46% reduced rate compared with those on an SGLT2 inhibitor only, and a significant 49% reduced rate, compared with those on a GLP-1 RA only. These between-group separations broadened slightly during 3-year follow-up. Dr. Lopez did not report results of a direct comparison between patients on just an SGLT2 inhibitor and those on just a GLP-1 RA.
For the endpoint of all-cause death, those on combined treatment had a 1-year rate that was 83% below the rate among patients on only an SGLT2 inhibitor, and 81% below the rate among patients who received a GLP-1 RA but not the other class.
Dr. Lopez cautioned that selection bias could have influenced the outcomes of patients who received both classes rather than one or the other, and he also highlighted that the analysis relied on administrative data rather than information gleaned from more detailed medical records or prospectively collected findings and was limited by only including a very small number of women.
“Our results need to be validated in prospective studies,” he declared.
Dr. Lopez and Dr. Virani had no commercial disclosures.
WASHINGTON – Patients with type 2 diabetes and established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease treated with both an sodium-glucose transporter 2 inhibitor and a glucagonlike peptide–1 receptor agonist had a significant 80% cut in their rate of all-cause death during 1-year follow-up, compared with matched patients treated with an agent from either class alone in an observational, retrospective study of more than 15,000 people in the U.S. Veterans Affairs health system.
For the study’s primary endpoint, the combined rate of all-cause death, nonfatal MI, or nonfatal stroke, combined treatment with both an agent from the sodium-glucose transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor class and from the glucagonlike peptide–1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) class linked with a significant, roughly 50% cut in events during 1-year follow-up, compared with patients treated with an agent from just one of these two classes, Persio D. Lopez, MD, reported at the annual scientific sessions of the American College of Cardiology.
This improvement in the combined endpoint outcome resulted entirely from reduced all-cause mortality. Dual treatment showed no significant association with the incidence of nonfatal MIs or strokes, compared with monotherapy, with rates that were nearly identical regardless of whether patients took one of the agents or both, said Dr. Lopez, a cardiologist at Mount Sinai Morningside and the James J. Peters VA Medical Center, both in New York.
Combining classes for hard-to-control diabetes
“We’re not sure what drives combined use” of agents from both drug classes in these types of patients, admitted Dr. Lopez during his talk. “Our hypothesis is that dual treatment is used in patients with harder-to-control diabetes.”
Salim S. Virani, MD, PhD, who practices in the VA system but was not involved with the study, agreed that this is the likely explanation for most instances of high-risk VA patients with diabetes who receive agents from both classes.
“I have a few patients” on both classes, usually “patients with higher starting A1c levels who need greater glycemic control,” said Dr. Virani, professor of medicine at Baylor College of Medicine and a cardiologist at the Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, both in Houston.
U.S. use of either drug class, let alone both, in patients with type 2 diabetes is still struggling to gain traction in U.S. practice and remains limited to a minority of these patients, a prescribing pattern reflected in recent VA data. Analysis of more than half a million patients in the VA system with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) who received treatment at any of 130 VA medical centers throughout 2020 showed that 11% had received an SGLT2 inhibitor, and 8% a GLP-1 RA.
The most frequently used antidiabetes drug classes in these patients were insulin in 36%, biguanides in 47%, and sulfonylureas in 22%.
These data also showed a striking level of variability among the 130 VA centers, with some of the sites prescribing either an SGLT2 inhibitor or a GLP-1 RA to as few as about 3% each of these patients, while other centers had a roughly 10-fold higher prescription rate for each of about 25%-30% of their patients with type 2 diabetes and ASCVD.
Despite the overall modest level of use of both classes in these types of patients as recently as 2020, no barriers exist at the VA to prescribing an agent from one or both classes “if you provide a good reason” for a patient to receive the drugs, Dr. Virani said in an interview. He also predicted that use of both classes in these patients, including combination treatment, will likely soon expand.
‘A lot of interest’ in combining an SGLT2 inhibitor and a GLP-1 RA
“There will be a lot of interest in combing the two classes. It makes intuitive sense [to treat with both classes] because most patients with diabetes need more than one drug” for glycemic control, he noted. “Why not use two classes that each reduce a patient’s risk” for adverse outcomes involving ASCVD, heart failure, and renal dysfunction, added Dr. Virani.
The study run by Dr. Lopez and his associates used data collected in the National VA Database and included 121,156 patients with both type 2 diabetes and established ASCVD. Using propensity-score matching the researchers compiled three subgroups that each included 5,277 matched patients. One subgroup had patients prescribed an SGLT2 inhibitor, a second subgroup included patients on a GLP-1 RA, and a third subgroup had patients on agents from both classes. Patient matching relied on age, sex, left ventricular ejection fraction, hemoglobin A1c level, systolic blood pressure, and the presence of coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease.
Patients included in the analysis averaged about 67 years of age; 97% were men, their average body mass index was about 34 kg/m2, their average A1c was about 7.9%, their average estimated glomerular filtration rate was about 55-66 mL/min per 1.73 m2, and their average left ventricular ejection fraction was about 55%. The database provided a median follow-up of 902 days (about 2.5 years). The prespecified primary endpoint focused on events that occurred during the first year of follow-up, but the investigators also ran a 3-year follow-up analysis on a post hoc basis.
The most common SGLT2 inhibitor received by these patients was empagliflozin (Jardiance), used on virtually everyone who received an agent from this class. In contrast, the GLP-1 RA drugs that patients received split more widely. The most prescribed agent was liraglutide (Victoza), followed by semaglutide (Ozempic), and dulaglutide (Trulicity), with fewer than 5% receiving exenatide (Bydureon, Byetta).
Regarding other treatments, about 97% of all patients received a statin, about 94% were on a renin-angiotensin system inhibitor, about 90% were on metformin, and roughly 75% were on insulin, aspirin, and a beta-blocker, with smaller numbers on other types of agents.
For the study’s primary endpoint, the 1-year incidence of combined ASCVD events including all-cause death, patients on agents from both classes had a significant 46% reduced rate compared with those on an SGLT2 inhibitor only, and a significant 49% reduced rate, compared with those on a GLP-1 RA only. These between-group separations broadened slightly during 3-year follow-up. Dr. Lopez did not report results of a direct comparison between patients on just an SGLT2 inhibitor and those on just a GLP-1 RA.
For the endpoint of all-cause death, those on combined treatment had a 1-year rate that was 83% below the rate among patients on only an SGLT2 inhibitor, and 81% below the rate among patients who received a GLP-1 RA but not the other class.
Dr. Lopez cautioned that selection bias could have influenced the outcomes of patients who received both classes rather than one or the other, and he also highlighted that the analysis relied on administrative data rather than information gleaned from more detailed medical records or prospectively collected findings and was limited by only including a very small number of women.
“Our results need to be validated in prospective studies,” he declared.
Dr. Lopez and Dr. Virani had no commercial disclosures.
AT ACC 2022
Counterfeit HIV drugs: Justice Department opens investigation
Since the start of the pandemic, supply-chain problems have permeated just about every industry sector. While most of the media attention has focused on toilet paper and retail shipment delays, a darker, more sinister supply chain disruption has been unfolding, one that entails a sophisticated criminal enterprise that has been operating at scale to distribute and profit from counterfeit HIV drugs.
Recently, news has emerged – most notably in the Wall Street Journal – with reports of a Justice Department investigation into what appears to be a national drug trafficking network comprising more than 70 distributors and marketers.
The details read like a best-selling crime novel.
Since last year, authorities have seized 85,247 bottles of counterfeit HIV drugs, both Biktarvy (bictegravir 50 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg tablets) and Descovy (emtricitabine 200 mg and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg tablets). Law enforcement has conducted raids at 17 locations in eight states. Doctored supply chain papers have provided cover for the fake medicines and the individuals behind them.
But unlike the inconvenience of sparse toilet paper, this crime poses life-threatening risks to millions of patients with HIV who rely on Biktarvy to suppress the virus or Descovy to prevent infection from it. Even worse, some patients have been exposed to over-the-counter painkillers or the antipsychotic drug quetiapine fumarate masquerading as HIV drugs in legitimate but repurposed bottles.
Gilead Sciences (Foster City, Calif.), which manufactures both Biktarvy and Descovy, declined to comment when contacted, instead referring this news organization to previous press statements.
Falsified HIV medications, illicit purchases over 2 Years
On Aug. 5, 2021, Gilead first warned the public that it had become aware of tampered and counterfeit Biktarvy and Descovy tablets. In coordination with the Food and Drug Administration, it alerted pharmacies to “investigate the potential for counterfeit or tampered Gilead medication sold by [unauthorized] distributors that may be within their recent supply.”
On Jan. 19, 2022, Gilead issued a second statement outlining ongoing actions in coordination with U.S. marshals and local law enforcement to remove these illegal medications from circulation and prevent further distribution.
The timing of the most recent announcement was not accidental. The day before, a federal judge serving the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York unsealed documents detailing the company’s lawsuit against dozens of individuals and entities who they alleged had engaged in a highly coordinated effort to defraud pharmacies and consumers. The suit followed two prior Gilead filings that ultimately resulted in court-issued ex parte seizure orders (orders that allow a court to seize property without the property owner’s consent) and the recovery of more than 1,000 bottles containing questionable Gilead medications.
The lawsuit centered on Cambridge, Mass.–based wholesale pharmaceutical distributor Safe Chain Solutions and its two cofounders. The document is peppered with terms such as “shifting series of fly-by-night corporate entities,” “gray market” distributors, a “dedicated sales force,” and “shell entities,” along with accusations that the defendants were believed to have made purchases of gold bullion, jewelry, and other luxury items for conversion into cash.
In a curious twist of fate, this sinister effort appeared to have been first revealed not by a pharmacist but by a patient who had returned a bottle of Biktarvy with “foreign medication inside” to the California pharmacy that dispensed it.
“Specifically with HIV medications, there’s no point in which the pharmacy is actually opening the bottle, breaking the seal, and counting out pills to put into a smaller prescription bottle,” Emily Heil, PharmD, BCIDP, AAHIVP, associate professor of infectious diseases in the department of pharmacy practice and science at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, Baltimore, told this news organization.
“But that’s also why pharmacies work with these centralized groups of distributors that maintain a chain of command and fidelity with drug manufacturers so that we don’t run into these situations,” she said.
This is the link in the chain where that tightly coordinated and highly regulated process was broken.
Although Gilead and Safe Chain Solutions were informed of the incident as early as August 2020, the distributor repeatedly refused to identify the supplier and the pedigree (the record demonstrating the chain of all sales or transfers of a specific drug, going back to the manufacturer, as required by the FDA’s Drug Supply Chain Security Act in 2013).
Later that year, Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson issued a media statement saying that they had been alerted to the distribution of counterfeit Symtuza (darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide) to three pharmacies in the United States.
A spokesperson for the FDA declined to comment on the ongoing investigation when contacted by this news organization and instead wrote in an email that the agency “will continue to use all available tools to ensure consumers and patients have access to a safe and effective medical product supply.”
Old dog, new tricks
This is not the first time that HIV drugs have been targeted for criminal benefit. An analysis published in September 2014 in JAMA highlighted a federal investigation that year into a $32 million dollar scheme to defraud Medicare’s Part D program for HIV drugs and divert them for resale on the black market.
What’s more, prior research and news reports highlight the attractiveness of HIV drug diversion both for the buyer and the seller – not only because of the cost of the drugs themselves but also because of institutional or systemic deficiencies that exclude certain individuals from obtaining treatment through federal initiatives such as the Ryan White/AIDS Drug Assistance program.
In its most recent statement, Gilead reinforced that this practice remains alive and well.
On the buyer side, the company stated, many of the counterfeits originated from suppliers who purchased Gilead HIV medication from individuals after it was first dispensed to them. Unfortunately, the exploitation of individuals with low incomes who experience homelessness or substance use/abuse echoes a pattern whereby HIV patients sell medications to cover personal needs or are forced to buy them on the black market to keep up with their treatment regimens.
On the supply side, All of these counterfeits were sold as though they were legitimate Gilead products.”
But counterfeit pedigrees make it impossible to verify where the products came from, how they have been handled and stored, and what pills are in the bottles – all of which can have dire consequences for patients who ingest them.
The ramifications can be devastating.
“With HIV meds specifically, the worst case scenario would be if the medication is not actually the medication they’re supposed to be on,” said Dr. Heil, reinforcing that the increased safety net provided with viral suppression and against transmission is lost.
Dr. Heil pointed to another significant risk: resistance.
“In a situation like this, where maybe it’s not the full strength of the medication, maybe it’s expired and lost potency or was not stored correctly or is not even the accurate medication, changing those drug level exposures potentially puts the patient at risk for developing resistance to their regimen without them knowing.”
Yet another risk was posed by the replacement of HIV drugs with other medications, such as quetiapine, which increased the risk for life-threatening and irreversible side effects. The lawsuit included a story of a patient who unknowingly took quetiapine after receiving a counterfeit bottle of Biktarvy and could not speak or walk afterward.
Where this tale will ultimately end is unclear. There’s no telling what other activities or bad actors the Justice Department investigation will uncover as it works to unravel the counterfeit network’s activities and deal with its aftermath.
Regardless, clinicians are encouraged to inform HIV patients about the risks associated with counterfeit medications, how to determine whether the drugs they’ve been dispensed are authentic, and to report any product they believe to be counterfeit or to have been tampered with to their doctors, pharmacies, and to Gilead or other drug manufacturers.
“It’s okay to ask questions of your pharmacy about where they get their medications from,” noted Dr. Heil. “If patients have access to an independent pharmacy, it’s a great way for them to have a relationship with their pharmacist.
“We went into this profession to be able to have those conversations with patients,” Dr. Heil said.
The FDA recommends that patients receiving these medications who believe that their drugs may be counterfeit or who experience any adverse effects report the event to FDA’s MedWatch Safety Information and Adverse Event Reporting Program (1-800-FDA-1088 or www.fda.gov/medwatch).
Dr. Heil reported having no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Since the start of the pandemic, supply-chain problems have permeated just about every industry sector. While most of the media attention has focused on toilet paper and retail shipment delays, a darker, more sinister supply chain disruption has been unfolding, one that entails a sophisticated criminal enterprise that has been operating at scale to distribute and profit from counterfeit HIV drugs.
Recently, news has emerged – most notably in the Wall Street Journal – with reports of a Justice Department investigation into what appears to be a national drug trafficking network comprising more than 70 distributors and marketers.
The details read like a best-selling crime novel.
Since last year, authorities have seized 85,247 bottles of counterfeit HIV drugs, both Biktarvy (bictegravir 50 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg tablets) and Descovy (emtricitabine 200 mg and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg tablets). Law enforcement has conducted raids at 17 locations in eight states. Doctored supply chain papers have provided cover for the fake medicines and the individuals behind them.
But unlike the inconvenience of sparse toilet paper, this crime poses life-threatening risks to millions of patients with HIV who rely on Biktarvy to suppress the virus or Descovy to prevent infection from it. Even worse, some patients have been exposed to over-the-counter painkillers or the antipsychotic drug quetiapine fumarate masquerading as HIV drugs in legitimate but repurposed bottles.
Gilead Sciences (Foster City, Calif.), which manufactures both Biktarvy and Descovy, declined to comment when contacted, instead referring this news organization to previous press statements.
Falsified HIV medications, illicit purchases over 2 Years
On Aug. 5, 2021, Gilead first warned the public that it had become aware of tampered and counterfeit Biktarvy and Descovy tablets. In coordination with the Food and Drug Administration, it alerted pharmacies to “investigate the potential for counterfeit or tampered Gilead medication sold by [unauthorized] distributors that may be within their recent supply.”
On Jan. 19, 2022, Gilead issued a second statement outlining ongoing actions in coordination with U.S. marshals and local law enforcement to remove these illegal medications from circulation and prevent further distribution.
The timing of the most recent announcement was not accidental. The day before, a federal judge serving the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York unsealed documents detailing the company’s lawsuit against dozens of individuals and entities who they alleged had engaged in a highly coordinated effort to defraud pharmacies and consumers. The suit followed two prior Gilead filings that ultimately resulted in court-issued ex parte seizure orders (orders that allow a court to seize property without the property owner’s consent) and the recovery of more than 1,000 bottles containing questionable Gilead medications.
The lawsuit centered on Cambridge, Mass.–based wholesale pharmaceutical distributor Safe Chain Solutions and its two cofounders. The document is peppered with terms such as “shifting series of fly-by-night corporate entities,” “gray market” distributors, a “dedicated sales force,” and “shell entities,” along with accusations that the defendants were believed to have made purchases of gold bullion, jewelry, and other luxury items for conversion into cash.
In a curious twist of fate, this sinister effort appeared to have been first revealed not by a pharmacist but by a patient who had returned a bottle of Biktarvy with “foreign medication inside” to the California pharmacy that dispensed it.
“Specifically with HIV medications, there’s no point in which the pharmacy is actually opening the bottle, breaking the seal, and counting out pills to put into a smaller prescription bottle,” Emily Heil, PharmD, BCIDP, AAHIVP, associate professor of infectious diseases in the department of pharmacy practice and science at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, Baltimore, told this news organization.
“But that’s also why pharmacies work with these centralized groups of distributors that maintain a chain of command and fidelity with drug manufacturers so that we don’t run into these situations,” she said.
This is the link in the chain where that tightly coordinated and highly regulated process was broken.
Although Gilead and Safe Chain Solutions were informed of the incident as early as August 2020, the distributor repeatedly refused to identify the supplier and the pedigree (the record demonstrating the chain of all sales or transfers of a specific drug, going back to the manufacturer, as required by the FDA’s Drug Supply Chain Security Act in 2013).
Later that year, Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson issued a media statement saying that they had been alerted to the distribution of counterfeit Symtuza (darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide) to three pharmacies in the United States.
A spokesperson for the FDA declined to comment on the ongoing investigation when contacted by this news organization and instead wrote in an email that the agency “will continue to use all available tools to ensure consumers and patients have access to a safe and effective medical product supply.”
Old dog, new tricks
This is not the first time that HIV drugs have been targeted for criminal benefit. An analysis published in September 2014 in JAMA highlighted a federal investigation that year into a $32 million dollar scheme to defraud Medicare’s Part D program for HIV drugs and divert them for resale on the black market.
What’s more, prior research and news reports highlight the attractiveness of HIV drug diversion both for the buyer and the seller – not only because of the cost of the drugs themselves but also because of institutional or systemic deficiencies that exclude certain individuals from obtaining treatment through federal initiatives such as the Ryan White/AIDS Drug Assistance program.
In its most recent statement, Gilead reinforced that this practice remains alive and well.
On the buyer side, the company stated, many of the counterfeits originated from suppliers who purchased Gilead HIV medication from individuals after it was first dispensed to them. Unfortunately, the exploitation of individuals with low incomes who experience homelessness or substance use/abuse echoes a pattern whereby HIV patients sell medications to cover personal needs or are forced to buy them on the black market to keep up with their treatment regimens.
On the supply side, All of these counterfeits were sold as though they were legitimate Gilead products.”
But counterfeit pedigrees make it impossible to verify where the products came from, how they have been handled and stored, and what pills are in the bottles – all of which can have dire consequences for patients who ingest them.
The ramifications can be devastating.
“With HIV meds specifically, the worst case scenario would be if the medication is not actually the medication they’re supposed to be on,” said Dr. Heil, reinforcing that the increased safety net provided with viral suppression and against transmission is lost.
Dr. Heil pointed to another significant risk: resistance.
“In a situation like this, where maybe it’s not the full strength of the medication, maybe it’s expired and lost potency or was not stored correctly or is not even the accurate medication, changing those drug level exposures potentially puts the patient at risk for developing resistance to their regimen without them knowing.”
Yet another risk was posed by the replacement of HIV drugs with other medications, such as quetiapine, which increased the risk for life-threatening and irreversible side effects. The lawsuit included a story of a patient who unknowingly took quetiapine after receiving a counterfeit bottle of Biktarvy and could not speak or walk afterward.
Where this tale will ultimately end is unclear. There’s no telling what other activities or bad actors the Justice Department investigation will uncover as it works to unravel the counterfeit network’s activities and deal with its aftermath.
Regardless, clinicians are encouraged to inform HIV patients about the risks associated with counterfeit medications, how to determine whether the drugs they’ve been dispensed are authentic, and to report any product they believe to be counterfeit or to have been tampered with to their doctors, pharmacies, and to Gilead or other drug manufacturers.
“It’s okay to ask questions of your pharmacy about where they get their medications from,” noted Dr. Heil. “If patients have access to an independent pharmacy, it’s a great way for them to have a relationship with their pharmacist.
“We went into this profession to be able to have those conversations with patients,” Dr. Heil said.
The FDA recommends that patients receiving these medications who believe that their drugs may be counterfeit or who experience any adverse effects report the event to FDA’s MedWatch Safety Information and Adverse Event Reporting Program (1-800-FDA-1088 or www.fda.gov/medwatch).
Dr. Heil reported having no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Since the start of the pandemic, supply-chain problems have permeated just about every industry sector. While most of the media attention has focused on toilet paper and retail shipment delays, a darker, more sinister supply chain disruption has been unfolding, one that entails a sophisticated criminal enterprise that has been operating at scale to distribute and profit from counterfeit HIV drugs.
Recently, news has emerged – most notably in the Wall Street Journal – with reports of a Justice Department investigation into what appears to be a national drug trafficking network comprising more than 70 distributors and marketers.
The details read like a best-selling crime novel.
Since last year, authorities have seized 85,247 bottles of counterfeit HIV drugs, both Biktarvy (bictegravir 50 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg tablets) and Descovy (emtricitabine 200 mg and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg tablets). Law enforcement has conducted raids at 17 locations in eight states. Doctored supply chain papers have provided cover for the fake medicines and the individuals behind them.
But unlike the inconvenience of sparse toilet paper, this crime poses life-threatening risks to millions of patients with HIV who rely on Biktarvy to suppress the virus or Descovy to prevent infection from it. Even worse, some patients have been exposed to over-the-counter painkillers or the antipsychotic drug quetiapine fumarate masquerading as HIV drugs in legitimate but repurposed bottles.
Gilead Sciences (Foster City, Calif.), which manufactures both Biktarvy and Descovy, declined to comment when contacted, instead referring this news organization to previous press statements.
Falsified HIV medications, illicit purchases over 2 Years
On Aug. 5, 2021, Gilead first warned the public that it had become aware of tampered and counterfeit Biktarvy and Descovy tablets. In coordination with the Food and Drug Administration, it alerted pharmacies to “investigate the potential for counterfeit or tampered Gilead medication sold by [unauthorized] distributors that may be within their recent supply.”
On Jan. 19, 2022, Gilead issued a second statement outlining ongoing actions in coordination with U.S. marshals and local law enforcement to remove these illegal medications from circulation and prevent further distribution.
The timing of the most recent announcement was not accidental. The day before, a federal judge serving the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York unsealed documents detailing the company’s lawsuit against dozens of individuals and entities who they alleged had engaged in a highly coordinated effort to defraud pharmacies and consumers. The suit followed two prior Gilead filings that ultimately resulted in court-issued ex parte seizure orders (orders that allow a court to seize property without the property owner’s consent) and the recovery of more than 1,000 bottles containing questionable Gilead medications.
The lawsuit centered on Cambridge, Mass.–based wholesale pharmaceutical distributor Safe Chain Solutions and its two cofounders. The document is peppered with terms such as “shifting series of fly-by-night corporate entities,” “gray market” distributors, a “dedicated sales force,” and “shell entities,” along with accusations that the defendants were believed to have made purchases of gold bullion, jewelry, and other luxury items for conversion into cash.
In a curious twist of fate, this sinister effort appeared to have been first revealed not by a pharmacist but by a patient who had returned a bottle of Biktarvy with “foreign medication inside” to the California pharmacy that dispensed it.
“Specifically with HIV medications, there’s no point in which the pharmacy is actually opening the bottle, breaking the seal, and counting out pills to put into a smaller prescription bottle,” Emily Heil, PharmD, BCIDP, AAHIVP, associate professor of infectious diseases in the department of pharmacy practice and science at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, Baltimore, told this news organization.
“But that’s also why pharmacies work with these centralized groups of distributors that maintain a chain of command and fidelity with drug manufacturers so that we don’t run into these situations,” she said.
This is the link in the chain where that tightly coordinated and highly regulated process was broken.
Although Gilead and Safe Chain Solutions were informed of the incident as early as August 2020, the distributor repeatedly refused to identify the supplier and the pedigree (the record demonstrating the chain of all sales or transfers of a specific drug, going back to the manufacturer, as required by the FDA’s Drug Supply Chain Security Act in 2013).
Later that year, Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson issued a media statement saying that they had been alerted to the distribution of counterfeit Symtuza (darunavir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide) to three pharmacies in the United States.
A spokesperson for the FDA declined to comment on the ongoing investigation when contacted by this news organization and instead wrote in an email that the agency “will continue to use all available tools to ensure consumers and patients have access to a safe and effective medical product supply.”
Old dog, new tricks
This is not the first time that HIV drugs have been targeted for criminal benefit. An analysis published in September 2014 in JAMA highlighted a federal investigation that year into a $32 million dollar scheme to defraud Medicare’s Part D program for HIV drugs and divert them for resale on the black market.
What’s more, prior research and news reports highlight the attractiveness of HIV drug diversion both for the buyer and the seller – not only because of the cost of the drugs themselves but also because of institutional or systemic deficiencies that exclude certain individuals from obtaining treatment through federal initiatives such as the Ryan White/AIDS Drug Assistance program.
In its most recent statement, Gilead reinforced that this practice remains alive and well.
On the buyer side, the company stated, many of the counterfeits originated from suppliers who purchased Gilead HIV medication from individuals after it was first dispensed to them. Unfortunately, the exploitation of individuals with low incomes who experience homelessness or substance use/abuse echoes a pattern whereby HIV patients sell medications to cover personal needs or are forced to buy them on the black market to keep up with their treatment regimens.
On the supply side, All of these counterfeits were sold as though they were legitimate Gilead products.”
But counterfeit pedigrees make it impossible to verify where the products came from, how they have been handled and stored, and what pills are in the bottles – all of which can have dire consequences for patients who ingest them.
The ramifications can be devastating.
“With HIV meds specifically, the worst case scenario would be if the medication is not actually the medication they’re supposed to be on,” said Dr. Heil, reinforcing that the increased safety net provided with viral suppression and against transmission is lost.
Dr. Heil pointed to another significant risk: resistance.
“In a situation like this, where maybe it’s not the full strength of the medication, maybe it’s expired and lost potency or was not stored correctly or is not even the accurate medication, changing those drug level exposures potentially puts the patient at risk for developing resistance to their regimen without them knowing.”
Yet another risk was posed by the replacement of HIV drugs with other medications, such as quetiapine, which increased the risk for life-threatening and irreversible side effects. The lawsuit included a story of a patient who unknowingly took quetiapine after receiving a counterfeit bottle of Biktarvy and could not speak or walk afterward.
Where this tale will ultimately end is unclear. There’s no telling what other activities or bad actors the Justice Department investigation will uncover as it works to unravel the counterfeit network’s activities and deal with its aftermath.
Regardless, clinicians are encouraged to inform HIV patients about the risks associated with counterfeit medications, how to determine whether the drugs they’ve been dispensed are authentic, and to report any product they believe to be counterfeit or to have been tampered with to their doctors, pharmacies, and to Gilead or other drug manufacturers.
“It’s okay to ask questions of your pharmacy about where they get their medications from,” noted Dr. Heil. “If patients have access to an independent pharmacy, it’s a great way for them to have a relationship with their pharmacist.
“We went into this profession to be able to have those conversations with patients,” Dr. Heil said.
The FDA recommends that patients receiving these medications who believe that their drugs may be counterfeit or who experience any adverse effects report the event to FDA’s MedWatch Safety Information and Adverse Event Reporting Program (1-800-FDA-1088 or www.fda.gov/medwatch).
Dr. Heil reported having no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.