Explore the vast range of titles available.

A peanut-derived protein product, AR101, used in an oral desensitization protocol in children and adolescents with severe peanut allergy increased the amount of oral peanut protein tolerated in approximately two thirds of participants who received AR101, as compared with 1 of 25 controls.

Antibodies targeting interleukin (IL)-23 and IL-17A effectively treat moderate-to-severe psoriasis. ECLIPSE is the first comparator study of an IL-23p19 inhibitor, guselkumab, versus an IL-17A inhibitor, secukinumab. The primary objective of this study was to show superiority of clinical response at week 48 for guselkumab versus secukinumab. In this phase 3, multicentre, double-blind, randomised, comparator-controlled trial at 142 outpatient clinical sites in nine countries (Australia, Canada, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Spain, and the USA), eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had moderate-to-severe plaque-type psoriasis, and were candidates for phototherapy or systemic therapy. Eligible patients were randomly assigned with permuted block randomisation using an interactive web response system to receive either guselkumab (100 mg at weeks 0 and 4 then every 8 weeks) or secukinumab (300 mg at weeks 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4, and then every 4 weeks). The primary endpoint, the proportion of patients in the intention-to-treat population who achieved 90% reduction or more from baseline of Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 90 response) at week 48, and major secondary endpoints (the proportions of patients in the guselkumab group and in the secukinumab group who achieved a PASI 75 response at both weeks 12 and 48, a PASI 90 response at week 12, a PASI 75 response at week 12, a PASI 100 response at week 48, an Investigator's Global Assessment [IGA] score of 0 [cleared] at week 48, and an IGA score of 0 or 1 [minimal] at week 48) were to be tested in a fixed sequence to control type I error rate. Safety was evaluated in patients who received one or more doses of study drug from week 0 to 56. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03090100. This study was done between April 27, 2017, and Sept 20, 2018. 1048 eligible patients were enrolled and, of these, 534 were assigned to receive guselkumab and 514 to receive secukinumab. The proportion of patients with a PASI 90 response at week 48 was greater in the guselkumab group (451 [84%]) than in the secukinumab group (360 [70%]; p<0·0001). Although non-inferiority (margin of 10 percentage points) was established for the first major secondary endpoint (452 [85%] of patients in the guselkumab group vs 412 [80%] of patients in the secukinumab group achieving a PASI 75 response at both weeks 12 and 48), superiority was not established (p=0·0616). Consequently, formal statistical testing was not done for subsequent major secondary endpoints. Proportions of patients with adverse events, infections, and serious adverse events were similar between the two treatments and, in general, safety findings were consistent with registrational trial observations. Guselkumab showed superior long-term efficacy based on PASI 90 at week 48 when compared with secukinumab for treating moderate-to-severe psoriasis. This finding could assist health-care providers in their decision making process when selecting a biologic for treating moderate-to-severe psoriasis. This study was funded by Janssen Research & Development.

\"Preface This book started out as an interesting set of conversations with some very insightful and intelligent people. For twenty-five years, I've studied supply chains in almost every industry, including oil and gas, automotive, electronics, industrial production, and even financial services. And every time I met with executives, I met with the same statements: \"We're different-- you don't understand.\" But in the end, after spending enough time with these executives, it became clear that the same principles of supply chain management applied. Perhaps a different context, different terminology, but in the end, the same rules applied. When I started dabbling in healthcare, I originally encountered the same sets of objections. \"Healthcare is different,\" I would hear, \"After all, you have to consider the patient.\" But as I spent more and more time with healthcare executives, I only rarely heard the patient mentioned in the discussion. More often than not, the discussion focused on compliance, reimbursement, diagnosis-related groups (DRGs), and other terms that had very little to do with patient care. And as I studied the industry more, it became clear that organizations in the healthcare value chain, from the patient through hospitals, wholesalers, through insurance payers, manufacturers, and finally research and development (R&D), were not very well connected at all\"-- Provided by publisher.

Risankizumab, an interleukin (IL)-23 p19 inhibitor, was evaluated for safety and efficacy as induction therapy in patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease. ADVANCE and MOTIVATE were randomised, double-masked, placebo-controlled, phase 3 induction studies. Eligible patients aged 16–80 years with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease, previously showing intolerance or inadequate response to one or more approved biologics or conventional therapy (ADVANCE) or to biologics (MOTIVATE), were randomly assigned to receive a single dose of intravenous risankizumab (600 mg or 1200 mg) or placebo (2:2:1 in ADVANCE, 1:1:1 in MOTIVATE) at weeks 0, 4, and 8. We used interactive response technology for random assignment, with stratification by number of previous failed biologics, corticosteroid use at baseline, and Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's disease (SES-CD). All patients and study personnel (excluding pharmacists who prepared intravenous solutions) were masked to treatment allocation throughout the study. Coprimary endpoints were clinical remission (defined by Crohn's disease activity index [CDAI] or patient-reported outcome criteria [average daily stool frequency and abdominal pain score]) and endoscopic response at week 12. The intention-to-treat population (all eligible patients who received at least one dose of study drug in the 12-week induction period) was analysed for efficacy outcomes. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. Both trials were registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03105128 (ADVANCE) and NCT03104413 (MOTIVATE), and are now complete. Participants were enrolled between May 10, 2017, and Aug 24, 2020 (ADVANCE trial), and Dec 18, 2017 and Sept 9, 2020 (MOTIVATE trial). In ADVANCE, 931 patients were assigned to either risankizumab 600 mg (n=373), risankizumab 1200 mg (n=372), or placebo (n=186). In MOTIVATE, 618 patients were assigned to risankizumab 600 mg (n=206), risankizumab 1200 mg (n=205), or placebo (n=207). The primary analysis population comprised 850 participants in ADVANCE and 569 participants in MOTIVATE. All coprimary endpoints at week 12 were met in both trials with both doses of risankizumab (p values ≤0·0001). In ADVANCE, CDAI clinical remission rate was 45% (adjusted difference 21%, 95% CI 12–29; 152/336) with risankizumab 600 mg and 42% (17%, 8–25; 141/339) with risankizumab 1200 mg versus 25% (43/175) with placebo; stool frequency and abdominal pain score clinical remission rate was 43% (22%, 14–30; 146/336) with risankizumab 600 mg and 41% (19%, 11–27; 139/339) with risankizumab 1200 mg versus 22% (38/175) with placebo; and endoscopic response rate was 40% (28%, 21–35; 135/336) with risankizumab 600 mg and 32% (20%, 14–27; 109/339) with risankizumab 1200 mg versus 12% (21/175) with placebo. In MOTIVATE, CDAI clinical remission rate was 42% (22%, 13–31; 80/191) with risankizumab 600 mg and 40% (21%, 12–29; 77/191) with risankizumab 1200 mg versus 20% (37/187) with placebo; stool frequency and abdominal pain score clinical remission rate was 35% (15%, 6–24; 66/191) with risankizumab 600 mg and 40% (20%, 12–29; 76/191) with risankizumab 1200 mg versus 19% (36/187) with placebo; and endoscopic response rate was 29% (18%, 10–25; 55/191) with risankizumab 600 mg and 34% (23%, 15–31; 65/191) with risankizumab 1200 mg versus 11% (21/187) with placebo. The overall incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar among the treatment groups in both trials. Three deaths occurred during induction (two in the placebo group [ADVANCE] and one in the risankizumab 1200 mg group [MOTIVATE]). The death in the risankizumab-treated patient was deemed unrelated to the study drug. Risankizumab was effective and well tolerated as induction therapy in patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease. AbbVie.

ObjectivesTo compare the benefits of a tight-control/treat-to-target strategy (TC/T2T) in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) with those of usual care (UC).MethodsPragmatic, prospective, cluster-randomised, controlled, open, 1-year trial (NCT03043846). 18 centres were randomised (1:1). Patients met Axial Spondylo Arthritis International Society (ASAS) criteria for axSpA, had an Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) ≥2.1, received non-optimal treatment by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and were biologic-naive.Interventions(1) TC/T2T: visits every 4 weeks and prespecified strategy based on treatment intensification until achieving target (ie, ASDAS <2.1); (2) UC: visits every 12 weeks and treatment at the rheumatologist’s discretion.Main outcomePercentage of patients with a ≥30% improvement on the ASAS-Health Index (ASAS-HI). Other efficacy outcomes and adverse events were recorded. A health economic evaluation was performed.Statistical analysisTwo-level mixed models were used to estimate efficacy outcomes. Cost-effectiveness was assessed by the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for TC/T2T versus UC.Results160 patients were included (80/group). Mean (SD) age was 37.9 (11.0) years and disease duration was 3.7 (6.2) years; 51.2% were men. ASDAS at inclusion was 3.0 (0.7), and ASAS-HI was 8.6 (3.7). ASAS-HI improved by ≥30% in 47.3% of the TC/T2T arm and in 36.1% of those receiving UC (non-significant). All secondary efficacy outcomes were more frequent in the TC/T2T arm, although not all statistically significant. Safety was similar in both arms. From a societal perspective, TC/T2T resulted in an additional 0.04 QALY, and saved €472 compared with UC.ConclusionTC/T2T was not significantly superior to UC for the primary outcome, while many secondary efficacy outcomes favoured it, had a similar safety profile and was favourable from a societal health economic perspective.Trial registration number NCT03043846.

Inflammation is a physiological response to different pathological, cellular or vascular damages due to physical, chemical or mechanical trauma. It is characterized by pain, redness, heat and swelling. Current natural drugs are carefully chosen as a novel therapeutic strategy for the management of inflammatory diseases. Different phytochemical constituents are present in natural products. These phytochemicals have high efficacy both in vivo and in vitro. Among them, flavonoids occur in many foods, vegetables and herbal medicines and are considered as the most active constituent, having the ability to attenuate inflammation. Kaempferol is a polyphenol that is richly found in fruits, vegetables and herbal medicines. It is also found in plant-derived beverages. Kaempferol is used in the management of various ailments but there is no available review article that can summarize all the natural sources and biological activities specifically focusing on the anti-inflammatory effect of kaempferol. Therefore, this article is aimed at providing a brief updated review of the literature regarding the anti-inflammatory effect of kaempferol and its possible molecular mechanisms of action. Furthermore, the review provides the available updated literature regarding the natural sources, chemistry, biosynthesis, oral absorption, metabolism, bioavailability and therapeutic effect of kaempferol.

Natural products and their structural analogues have historically made a major contribution to pharmacotherapy, especially for cancer and infectious diseases. Nevertheless, natural products also present challenges for drug discovery, such as technical barriers to screening, isolation, characterization and optimization, which contributed to a decline in their pursuit by the pharmaceutical industry from the 1990s onwards. In recent years, several technological and scientific developments — including improved analytical tools, genome mining and engineering strategies, and microbial culturing advances — are addressing such challenges and opening up new opportunities. Consequently, interest in natural products as drug leads is being revitalized, particularly for tackling antimicrobial resistance. Here, we summarize recent technological developments that are enabling natural product-based drug discovery, highlight selected applications and discuss key opportunities.Natural products have historically made a major contribution to pharmacotherapy, but also present challenges for drug discovery, such as technical barriers to screening, isolation, characterization and optimization. This Review discusses recent technological developments — including improved analytical tools, genome mining and engineering strategies, and microbial culturing advances — that are enabling a revitalization of natural product-based drug discovery.

Key Points Natural products continue to be an important source of leads for new medicines, despite reduced interest from large pharmaceutical companies. Screening collections of natural products can be assembled economically to provide excellent coverage of drug-like chemical space and in formats that are compatible with high-throughput bioassays. Metabolomics enables the rapid identification of novel compounds in complex mixtures of natural products and also provides a means to monitor the production of target molecules during fermentation or other production processes. Metagenomics and other genetic engineering techniques are enabling the production of target compounds in convenient systems, breaking away from the bottleneck otherwise created by microorganisms that are difficult to culture. Examples of recent and current applications of natural products are described for the discovery of antimicrobials and for inhibitors of protein–protein interactions, particularly as anticancer agents. The screening of natural products for lead molecules is an attractive strategy, as most natural products fall within biologically relevant chemical space. In this Review, Harvey, Edrada-Ebel and Quinn discuss how advanced screening, metabolomics and metagenomics approaches can be used in the identification, validation and production of naturally sourced compounds, and highlight examples of naturally derived antimicrobials and inhibitors of protein–protein interactions. Natural products have been a rich source of compounds for drug discovery. However, their use has diminished in the past two decades, in part because of technical barriers to screening natural products in high-throughput assays against molecular targets. Here, we review strategies for natural product screening that harness the recent technical advances that have reduced these barriers. We also assess the use of genomic and metabolomic approaches to augment traditional methods of studying natural products, and highlight recent examples of natural products in antimicrobial drug discovery and as inhibitors of protein–protein interactions. The growing appreciation of functional assays and phenotypic screens may further contribute to a revival of interest in natural products for drug discovery.