piperidines and abiraterone

Among the 35 new molecular entities approved by the FDA in 2011, 17 were particularly notable for their significant contributions to the health of patients, including abiraterone acetate, vandetanib, belatacept and fidaxomicin. Thus, abiraterone acetate, namely Zytiga®, was included as the first in a new class of drugs to treat late-stage prostate cancer. The ability of Zytiga® to prolong survival in these patients was considered as significant because they have few other treatments options and the benefits of Zytiga® outweighed the risks of reported side-effects. Vandetanib, namely Caprelsa®, was also considered as a relevant drug since it represents the first drug approved to treat particularly aggressive medullary thyroid cancer, an orphan disease. Despite huge progress in transplantation, renal transplantation remains a serious problem since patients treated with the calcineurin inhibitors cyclosporine and tacrolimus are at high risk of developing renal injury. With longer follow-up, the novel immunosuppressant belatacept continued to show better renal function compared with a cyclosporine-based regimen, as well as a consistent safety profile and comparable efficacy. It was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in June 2011 for the prophylaxis of organ rejection in adult recipients of a kidney transplant acting by a selective T-cell costimulation blocker given as an infusion. Clostridium difficile is currently the most important cause of infectious diarrhea in the United States. Fidaxomicin, a macrolide antibiotic, was recently approved for treatment of these infections (CDIs). It could be an alternative treatment for infection with C. difficile, with similar efficacy and safety to vancomycin. Fidaxomicin has minimal activity against Bacteroides species, which may be advantageous in maintaining colonization resistance and protecting the gastrointestinal tract from colonization by C. difficile.

Topics: Abatacept; Aminoglycosides; Androstenes; Androstenols; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antineoplastic Agents; Clostridioides difficile; Clostridium Infections; Enzyme Inhibitors; Fidaxomicin; Humans; Immunoconjugates; Immunosuppressive Agents; Male; Piperidines; Prostatic Neoplasms; Quinazolines; Thyroid Neoplasms

To assess the safety and pharmacokinetics and determine the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of niraparib with apalutamide or abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).. BEDIVERE was a multicenter, open-label, phase 1b study of niraparib 200 or 300 mg/day with apalutamide 240 mg or AAP (abiraterone acetate 1000 mg; prednisone 10 mg). Patients with mCRPC were previously treated with ≥ 2 lines of systemic therapy, including ≥ 1 androgen receptor-axis-targeted therapy for prostate cancer.. Thirty-three patients were enrolled (niraparib-apalutamide, 6; niraparib-AAP, 27). No dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were reported when combinations included niraparib 200 mg; five patients receiving niraparib 300 mg experienced DLTs [niraparib-apalutamide, 2/3 patients (66.7%); niraparib-AAP, 3/8 patients (37.5%)]. Although data are limited, niraparib exposures were lower when given with apalutamide compared with historical niraparib monotherapy exposures in patients with solid tumors. Because of the higher incidence of DLTs, the niraparib-apalutamide combination and niraparib 300 mg combination with AAP were not further evaluated. Niraparib 200 mg was selected as the RP2D with AAP. Of 19 patients receiving niraparib 200 mg with AAP, 12 (63.2%) had grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events, the most common being thrombocytopenia (26.3%) and hypertension (21.1%). Five patients (26.3%) had adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation.. These results support the choice of niraparib 200 mg as the RP2D with AAP. The niraparib-AAP combination was tolerable in patients with mCRPC, with no new safety signals. An ongoing phase 3 study is further assessing this combination in patients with mCRPC.. NCT02924766 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Androstenes; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Humans; Indazoles; Male; Middle Aged; Piperidines; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Prednisone; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant; Receptors, Androgen; Thiohydantoins

The analysis of adverse events plays an important role in the benefit assessment of drugs. Consequently, results on adverse events are an integral part of reimbursement dossiers submitted by pharmaceutical companies to health policy decision-makers. Methods applied in the analysis of adverse events commonly include simple standard methods for contingency tables. However, the results produced may be misleading if observations are censored at the time of discontinuation due to treatment switching or noncompliance, resulting in unequal follow-up periods. In this paper, we present examples to show that the application of inadequate methods for the analysis of adverse events in the reimbursement dossier can lead to a downgrading of the evidence on a drug's benefit in the subsequent assessment, as greater harm from the drug cannot be excluded with sufficient certainty. Legal regulations on the benefit assessment of drugs in Germany are presented, in particular, with regard to the analysis of adverse events. Differences in safety considerations between the drug approval process and the benefit assessment are discussed. We show that the naive application of simple proportions in reimbursement dossiers frequently leads to uninterpretable results if observations are censored and the average follow-up periods differ between treatment groups. Likewise, the application of incidence rates may be misleading in the case of recurrent events and unequal follow-up periods. To allow for an appropriate benefit assessment of drugs, adequate survival time methods accounting for time dependencies and duration of follow-up are required, not only for time-to-event efficacy endpoints but also for adverse events. © 2016 The Authors. Pharmaceutical Statistics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Topics: Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems; Androstenes; Antineoplastic Agents; Clinical Trials as Topic; Drug Approval; Drug Industry; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Germany; Humans; Male; Piperidines; Prostatic Neoplasms; Quinazolines; Survival Rate; Thyroid Neoplasms

Topics: Androstenes; Androstenols; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antineoplastic Agents; Axitinib; Biomarkers, Tumor; Brentuximab Vedotin; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Clinical Trials as Topic; Crizotinib; Drug Approval; Female; Humans; Imidazoles; Immunoconjugates; Indazoles; Indoles; Ipilimumab; Lung Neoplasms; Male; Melanoma; Molecular Targeted Therapy; Neoplasms; Piperidines; Prostatic Neoplasms; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Quinazolines; Rare Diseases; Sulfonamides; Survival Analysis; United States; United States Food and Drug Administration; Vemurafenib