Explore the vast range of titles available.

In two trials involving patients with hepatitis C in whom previous treatment with direct-acting antiviral agents failed, treatment for 12 weeks with sofosbuvir, velpatasvir, and voxilaprevir achieved high rates of sustained virologic response. The majority of patients who are chronically infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) can now be successfully treated with drugs that directly target viral replication. 1 , 2 Combination regimens of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) provide rates of sustained virologic response exceeding 90%, regardless of HCV genotype, disease stage, or treatment history. 3 The proportion of patients who do not have a sustained virologic response to treatment with approved regimens is small, but given the size of the infected population — estimates range up to 150 million people worldwide 4 — the absolute number of such patients is substantial and will increase as more . . .

In this phase 3 study involving patients with HCV genotype 1, 2, 3, 4, or 6 and decompensated cirrhosis, sofosbuvir–velpatasvir with or without ribavirin for 12 weeks or sofosbuvir–velpatasvir for 24 weeks resulted in high rates of sustained virologic response. The number of patients with decompensated cirrhosis caused by chronic infection with the hepatitis C virus (HCV) is projected to rise in the coming decade. 1 For many years, the only treatment option for such patients was liver transplantation. Recently, however, clinical trials of newly approved direct-acting antiviral agents have shown that it is possible to treat HCV infection safely and effectively in patients with decompensated cirrhosis and that successful treatment is associated with early improvement in liver function. 2 – 11 The possible long-term benefits of treatment on existing liver disease remain unknown. The only regimen that is currently approved for the . . .

In two phase 3 trials involving patients with hepatitis C virus infection, including those with cirrhosis, 12 weeks of sofosbuvir–velpatasvir resulted in a sustained virologic response in 99% of patients with genotype 2 and 95% of those with genotype 3. Hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotypes 2 and 3 account for an estimated 35% of global HCV infections, affecting up to 58 million persons. 1 , 2 Unlike HCV genotype 1, genotypes 2 and 3 are common in low-income regions in Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, and Eastern Europe. 1 Before the advent of direct-acting antiviral agents, HCV genotypes 2 and 3 were grouped together in treatment guidelines as “easy-to-treat” genotypes. However, recent studies have shown that HCV genotype 3 is associated with more rapid disease progression and lower rates of response to treatment than is HCV genotype 2, especially in patients with cirrhosis . . .

Despite improved efficacy with first-line immune checkpoint inhibitors plus platinum-based chemotherapy for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC), survival remains poor. In this study, we aimed to compare lurbinectedin plus atezolizumab and atezolizumab alone as maintenance therapies in patients with ES-SCLC without progression after induction therapy with atezolizumab, carboplatin, and etoposide. IMforte was a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial done at 96 hospitals and medical centres in 13 countries (Belgium, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Mexico, Poland, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, Türkiye, the UK, and the USA). Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with treatment-naive ES-SCLC. Patients received four 21-day cycles of induction treatment (atezolizumab, carboplatin, and etoposide). After completing induction treatment, eligible patients without disease progression were randomly assigned (1:1) using permuted blocks (Interactive Voice/Web Response System) to receive maintenance treatment intravenously every 3 weeks with lurbinectedin (3·2 mg/m2; with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor prophylaxis) plus atezolizumab (1200 mg) or atezolizumab (1200 mg). The two primary endpoints were independent review facility-assessed (IRF) progression-free survival and overall survival, measured from randomisation into the maintenance phase. Efficacy endpoints were assessed in the full analysis set, which included all patients who were randomly assigned to maintenance phase treatment, regardless of whether they received their assigned study treatment. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of lurbinectedin or atezolizumab, and was analysed according to the treatment received. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05091567, and is closed for recruitment. Between Nov 17, 2021, and Jan 11, 2024, 895 patients were screened for enrolment, of whom 660 (74%) were enrolled into the induction phase. Between May 24, 2022, and April 30, 2024, 483 (73%) of 660 patients entered the maintenance phase and were randomly assigned to lurbinectedin plus atezolizumab (n=242) or atezolizumab (n=241). At the data cutoff (July 29, 2024), IRF progression-free survival was longer in the lurbinectedin plus atezolizumab group than the atezolizumab group (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·54 [95% CI 0·43–0·67]; p<0·0001), as was overall survival (stratified HR 0·73 [0·57–0·95]; p=0·017). 92 (38%) of 242 patients in the lurbinectedin plus atezolizumab group and 53 (22%) of 240 patients in the atezolizumab group had grade 3–4 adverse events. The most common grade 3–4 events in the lurbinectedin plus atezolizumab group were anaemia (20 [8%] of 242 patients), decreased neutrophil count (18 [7%] patients), and decreased platelet count (18 [7%] patients) and the most common events in the atezolizumab group were hyponatremia (five [2%] of 240 patients), dyspnoea (four [2%] patients), and pneumonia (four [2%] patients). Grade 5 adverse events occurred in 12 (5%) of 242 patients in the lurbinectedin plus atezolizumab group and six (3%) of 240 patients in the atezolizumab group. The incidence of myelosuppressive toxicities (eg, neutropenia and leukopenia) was higher in the lurbinectedin plus atezolizumab group than the atezolizumab group. IRF progression-free survival and overall survival were longer in the lurbinectedin plus atezolizumab group than the atezolizumab group for patients with ES-SCLC, albeit with a higher incidence of adverse events. Lurbinectedin plus atezolizumab represents a novel therapeutic option for first-line maintenance treatment in this setting. F Hoffmann-La Roche and Jazz Pharmaceuticals.

BackgroundIn Japan, hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected patients with decompensated cirrhosis currently have no treatment options. In this Phase 3 study, we evaluated sofosbuvir–velpatasvir with or without ribavirin for 12 weeks in patients with any HCV genotype and decompensated cirrhosis [Child–Pugh–Turcotte (CPT) class B or C] in Japan.MethodsPatients were randomized 1:1 to receive sofosbuvir–velpatasvir with or without ribavirin for 12 weeks. Randomization was stratified by CPT class and genotype. Sustained virologic response 12 weeks following completion of treatment (SVR12) was the primary efficacy endpoint.ResultsOf the 102 patients enrolled, 57% were treatment naive, 78% and 20% had genotype 1 and 2 HCV infection, respectively, and 77% and 20% had CPT class B and C cirrhosis, respectively, at baseline. Overall, 61% of patients were female and the mean age was 66 years (range 41–83). SVR12 rates were 92% (47/51) in each group. Among patients who achieved SVR12, 26% had improved CPT class from baseline to posttreatment week 12. Most adverse events (AEs) were consistent with clinical sequelae of advanced liver disease or known toxicities of ribavirin. Four patients (8%) who received sofosbuvir–velpatasvir and seven (14%) who received sofosbuvir–velpatasvir plus ribavirin experienced a serious AE. The 3 deaths (bacterial sepsis, gastric varices hemorrhage, hepatocellular carcinoma) were attributed to liver disease progression.ConclusionSofosbuvir–velpatasvir for 12 weeks provides a highly effective and well-tolerated therapy for Japanese patients with HCV and decompensated cirrhosis. Ribavirin did not improve efficacy but increased toxicity.

In this analysis of the ASTRAL trials (non-opioid substitution therapy [OST], n = 984; OST, n = 51) evaluating the once-daily, pan-genotypic regimen of sofosbuvir/velpatasvir for hepatitis C virus infection, OST did not impact completion, adherence, sustained virologic response (SVR12), or safety. SVR12 was 96% (95% confidence interval, 87%, >99%) in those receiving OST.

This open-label, two-part, phase Ib drug–drug interaction study investigated whether the pharmacokinetic (PK) and safety profiles of lurbinectedin (LRB), a marine-derived drug, are affected by co-administration of itraconazole (ITZ), a strong CYP3A4 inhibitor, in adult patients with advanced solid tumors. In Part A, three patients were sequentially assigned to Sequence 1 (LRB 0.8 mg/m2, 1-h intravenous [IV] + ITZ 200 mg/day oral in Cycle 1 [C1] and LRB alone 3.2 mg/m2, 1 h, IV in Cycle 2 [C2]). In Part B, 11 patients were randomized (1:1) to receive either Sequence 1 (LRB at 0.9 mg/m2 + ITZ in C1 and LRB alone in C2) or Sequence 2 (LRB alone in C1 and LRB + ITZ in C2). Eleven patients were evaluable for PK analysis: three in Part A and eight in Part B (four per sequence). The systemic total exposure of LRB increased with ITZ co-administration: 15% for Cmax, area under the curve (AUC) 2.4-fold for AUC0–t and 2.7-fold for AUC0–∞. Co-administration with ITZ produced statistically significant modifications in the unbound plasma LRB PK parameters. The LRB safety profile was consistent with the toxicities described in previous studies. Co-administration with multiple doses of ITZ significantly altered LRB systemic exposure. Hence, to avoid LRB overexposure when co-administered with strong CYP3A4 inhibitors, an LRB dose reduction proportional to CL reduction should be applied.

SummaryBackground A phase I study found remarkable activity and manageable toxicity for doxorubicin (bolus) plus lurbinectedin (1-h intravenous [i.v.] infusion) on Day 1 every three weeks (q3wk) as second-line therapy in relapsed small cell lung cancer (SCLC). An expansion cohort further evaluated this combination. Patients and methods Twenty-eight patients with relapsed SCLC after no more than one line of cytotoxic-containing chemotherapy were treated: 18 (64%) with sensitive disease (chemotherapy-free interval [CTFI] ≥90 days) and ten (36%) with resistant disease (CTFI <90 days; including six with refractory disease [CTFI ≤30 days]). Results Ten patients showed confirmed response (overall response rate [ORR] = 36%); median progression-free survival (PFS) = 3.3 months; median overall survival (OS) = 7.9 months. ORR was 50% in sensitive disease (median PFS = 5.7 months; median OS = 11.5 months) and 10% in resistant disease (median PFS = 1.3 months; median OS = 4.6 months). The main toxicity was transient and reversible myelosuppression. Treatment-related non-hematological events (fatigue, nausea, decreased appetite, vomiting, alopecia) were mostly mild or moderate. Conclusion Doxorubicin 40 mg/m2 and lurbinectedin 2.0 mg/m2 on Day 1 q3wk has shown noteworthy activity in relapsed SCLC and a manageable safety profile. The combination is being evaluated as second-line therapy for SCLC in an ongoing, randomized phase III trial. Clinical trial registrationwww.ClinicalTrials.gov code: NCT01970540. Date of registration: 22 October, 2013.

New therapeutic options are needed for patients with heavily pretreated breast cancer. Etirinotecan pegol is a long-acting topoisomerase-I inhibitor designed to provide prolonged tumour-cell exposure to SN38, the active metabolite. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of two etirinotecan pegol dosing schedules in patients with previously treated metastatic breast cancer to determine an optimum dosing schedule for phase 3 trials. In this randomised, two-stage, open-label phase 2 trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older who had received taxane therapy and undergone two or fewer previous chemotherapy regimens for metastatic breast cancer, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, from 18 sites in three countries. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to etirinotecan pegol 145 mg/m2 every 14 days or every 21 days. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a confirmed objective response as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.0, analysed by intention to treat. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00802945. 70 patients (35 in each group) were randomly assigned to treatment between Feb 17, 2009 and April 13, 2010. Of the 70 patients, 20 (29%; 95% CI 18·4–40·6) achieved an objective response (two [3%] had a complete response and 18 [26%] had a partial response). Ten patients on the 14-day schedule achieved an objective response (29%; 95% CI 14·6–46·3; eight partial responses, two complete responses) as did ten on the 21-day schedule (29%; 95% CI 14·6–46·3; all partial responses). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were delayed diarrhoea (seven [20%] of 35 patients on the 14-day schedule vs eight [23%] of 35 patients on the 21-day schedule), fatigue (five [14%] vs three [9%]), neutropenia (four [11%] vs four [11%]), and dehydration (three [9%] vs four [11%]); 14 [20%] patients discontinued treatment because of drug-related toxicity. There were two possible drug-related deaths (acute renal failure and septic shock) in the 14-day group; other drug-related serious adverse events reported by more than one patient included ten [14%] patients with diarrhoea (six [17%] patients on the 14-day schedule vs four [11%] on the 21-day schedule), six [9%] with dehydration (two [6%] vs four [11%]), two [3%] with nausea (two [6%] vs none), and two [3%] with vomiting (two [6%] vs none). On the basis of the overall clinical data, pharmacokinetics, and tolerability profile, etirinotecan pegol 145 mg/m2 every 21 days has been selected for a phase 3 trial against treatment of physician's choice in patients with advanced breast cancer. Nektar Therapeutics.

Background and Objectives Velpatasvir (VEL; GS-5816) is a potent, pangenotypic hepatitis C virus (HCV), non-structural protein 5A inhibitor in clinical development for the treatment of chronic HCV infection. In vitro studies indicate that VEL may inhibit several drug transporters and be a substrate for enzyme/drug transport systems in vivo. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the potential of VEL as a perpetrator or victim of metabolic- and transporter-based drug–drug interactions using complementary probe drugs. Methods This Phase 1 study was a randomized, cross-over, open-label, single- and multiple-dose, five-cohort study. Serial blood samples were collected following oral administration of reference and test treatments. The primary pharmacokinetic parameters of each analyte were compared when administered alone or in combination. The 90 % confidence intervals (CI) for the ratio of the geometric least-squares means of the test and reference treatments was calculated for each analyte and parameter of interest. Results This study demonstrated that VEL is a weak (P-gp, OATP) to moderate (breast cancer resistance protein) transport inhibitor. As a victim of interactions, VEL is moderately affected by potent inhibitors and to a greater extent, potent inducers of enzyme/drug transporter systems. Conclusions The impact of specific transporters and overall contribution of drug transport vs. metabolizing enzymes on the disposition of VEL was characterized through the use of complementary probes, despite the lack of phenotypic specificity, and informs a broad range of drug–drug interaction recommendations.