Catalogue Search | MBRL
Search Results Heading
Explore the vast range of titles available.
MBRLSearchResults
-
DisciplineDiscipline
-
Is Peer ReviewedIs Peer Reviewed
-
Item TypeItem Type
-
SubjectSubject
-
YearFrom:-To:
-
More FiltersMore FiltersSourceLanguage
Done
Filters
Reset
2,090
result(s) for
"Pyrimidines - adverse effects"
Sort by:
Two-year efficacy and safety of risdiplam in patients with type 2 or non-ambulant type 3 spinal muscular atrophy (SMA)
by
Mazzone, Elena S.
,
Baranello, Giovanni
,
Deconinck, Nicolas
in
Atrophy
,
Azo Compounds
,
Azo Compounds - adverse effects
2023
Risdiplam is an oral, survival of motor neuron 2 (
SMN2
) pre-mRNA splicing modifier approved for the treatment of spinal muscular atrophy (SMA). SUNFISH (NCT02908685) Part 2, a Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, investigated the efficacy and safety of risdiplam in type 2 and non‑ambulant type 3 SMA. The primary endpoint was met: a significantly greater change from baseline in 32-item Motor Function Measure (MFM32) total score was observed with risdiplam compared with placebo at month 12. After 12 months, all participants received risdiplam while preserving initial treatment blinding. We report 24-month efficacy and safety results in this population. Month 24 exploratory endpoints included change from baseline in MFM32 and safety. MFM‑derived results were compared with an external comparator. At month 24 of risdiplam treatment, 32% of patients demonstrated improvement (a change of ≥ 3) from baseline in MFM32 total score; 58% showed stabilization (a change of ≥ 0). Compared with an external comparator, a treatment difference of 3.12 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.67–4.57) in favor of risdiplam was observed in MFM-derived scores. Overall, gains in motor function at month 12 were maintained or improved upon at month 24. In patients initially receiving placebo, MFM32 remained stable compared with baseline (0.31 [95% CI – 0.65 to 1.28]) after 12 months of risdiplam; 16% of patients improved their score and 59% exhibited stabilization. The safety profile after 24 months was consistent with that observed after 12 months. Risdiplam over 24 months resulted in further improvement or stabilization in motor function, confirming the benefit of longer-term treatment.
Journal Article
Cardiovascular and Cancer Risk with Tofacitinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis
by
Germino, Rebecca
,
Connell, Carol A
,
Bhatt, Deepak L
in
Aged
,
Antirheumatic Agents - adverse effects
,
Antirheumatic Agents - therapeutic use
2022
In this randomized noninferiority trial involving patients with rheumatoid arthritis, cardiovascular events and cancers occurred more frequently with tofacitinib than with a TNF inhibitor, and noninferiority of tofacitinib with respect to these end points was not established.
Journal Article
Amivantamab plus Lazertinib in Previously Untreated EGFR-Mutated Advanced NSCLC
2024
Amivantamab, an antibody against MET and EGFR, plus lazertinib, an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor, induced a response in 86% of previously untreated patients and led to a median progression-free survival of nearly 2 years.
Journal Article
Tofacitinib as Induction and Maintenance Therapy for Ulcerative Colitis
by
Niezychowski, Wojciech
,
Sandborn, William J
,
Lawendy, Nervin
in
Adult
,
Chi-Square Distribution
,
Colitis, Ulcerative - drug therapy
2017
In three phase 3 trials involving patients with ulcerative colitis, tofacitinib (an oral, small-molecule Janus kinase inhibitor) was more effective as induction and maintenance therapy than placebo. Infections were more common with tofacitinib.
Ulcerative colitis is characterized by an increased frequency of bowel movements and bloody diarrhea, which has a negative effect on quality of life.
1
Current therapies for ulcerative colitis include mesalamine, glucocorticoids, thiopurines, and antagonists to tumor necrosis factor (TNF) and α4β7 integrin.
1
–
5
Many patients do not have a response to these therapies or have a response that is not sustained. Additional treatment options with new mechanisms of action are needed to increase efficacy rates.
The Janus kinase (JAK) family comprises four intracellular tyrosine kinases — JAK1, JAK2, JAK3, and nonreceptor tyrosine-protein kinase 2 — that activate signal transducers and . . .
Journal Article
Ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab versus chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab in first-line treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (iLLUMINATE): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial
by
Flinn, Ian W
,
Novak, Jan
,
Ben-Yehuda, Dina
in
Aged
,
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized - administration & dosage
,
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized - adverse effects
2019
Both single-agent ibrutinib and chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab have shown superior efficacy to chlorambucil monotherapy and are standard first-line treatments in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. We compared the efficacy of the combination of ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab with chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab in first-line chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma.
iLLUMINATE is a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial done at 74 academic and community hospitals in Australia, Canada, Israel, New Zealand, Russia, Turkey, the EU, and the USA in patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma, either aged 65 years or older or younger than 65 years with coexisting conditions. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a blocked randomisation schedule, stratified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and cytogenetics, to receive ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab (oral ibrutinib [420 mg once daily continuously] combined with intravenous obinutuzumab [100 mg on day 1, 900 mg on day 2, 1000 mg on day 8, and 1000 mg on day 15 of cycle 1 and on day 1 of subsequent 28-day cycles, for a total of six cycles]) or chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab (oral chlorambucil [0·5 mg/kg bodyweight on days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle for six cycles] combined with the same obinutuzumab regimen). Allocation concealment was achieved using an interactive web response system. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by a masked independent review committee in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02264574), and patient enrolment is complete.
Between Oct 6, 2014, and Oct 12, 2015, 229 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab (n=113) or chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab (n=116). After a median follow-up of 31·3 months (IQR 29·4–33·2), median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab group (median not reached [95% CI 33·6–non-estimable]) than in the chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab group (19·0 months [15·1–22·1]; hazard ratio 0·23; 95% CI 0·15–0·37; p<0·0001). Estimated 30-month progression-free survival was 79% (95% CI 70–85) in the ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab group and 31% (23–40) in the chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab group. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events in both groups were neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. Serious adverse events occurred in 65 (58%) of 113 patients treated with ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab and 40 (35%) of 115 patients treated with chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab. Ibrutinib or chlorambucil treatment-related deaths were reported in one (1%) of 113 patients in the ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab group (sudden death) and one (1%) of 115 patients in the chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab group (neuroendocrine carcinoma of the skin).
Ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab is an efficacious and safe chemotherapy-free combination treatment in previously untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma independent of high-risk features and provides an alternative first-line treatment option for these patients.
Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company, and Janssen Research and Development.
Journal Article
Ibrutinib–Rituximab or Chemoimmunotherapy for Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia
by
Barr, Paul M
,
Cashen, Amanda F
,
Little, Richard F
in
Adenine - analogs & derivatives
,
Aged
,
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols - adverse effects
2019
Patients 70 years of age or younger with previously untreated CLL were randomly assigned to receive ibrutinib plus rituximab or chemoimmunotherapy with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab. The ibrutinib-based regimen led to prolonged progression-free and overall survival.
Journal Article
Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib monotherapy, tofacitinib with methotrexate, and adalimumab with methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (ORAL Strategy): a phase 3b/4, double-blind, head-to-head, randomised controlled trial
by
Kuropatkin, Gennady V
,
Soma, Koshika
,
Reyes, Bernadette Heizel M
in
Adalimumab - administration & dosage
,
Adalimumab - adverse effects
,
Adalimumab - therapeutic use
2017
Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. The Oral Rheumatoid Arthritis triaL (ORAL) Strategy aimed to assess the comparative efficacy of tofacitinib monotherapy, tofacitinib plus methotrexate, and adalimumab plus methotrexate for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in patients with a previous inadequate response to methotrexate.
ORAL Strategy was a 1 year, double-blind, phase 3b/4, head-to-head, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial in patients aged 18 years or older with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive oral tofacitinib (5 mg twice daily) monotherapy, oral tofacitinib (5 mg twice daily) plus methotrexate, or subcutaneous adalimumab (40 mg every other week) plus methotrexate at 194 centres in 25 countries. Eligible patients received live zoster vaccine at investigators' discretion. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who attained an American College of Rheumatology response of at least 50% (ACR50) at month 6 in the full analysis set (patients who were randomly assigned to a group and received at least one dose of the study treatment). Non-inferiority between groups was shown if the lower bound of the 98·34% CI of the difference between comparators was larger than −13·0%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02187055.
1146 patients received treatment (384 had tofacitinib monotherapy; 376 had tofacitinib and methotrexate; and 386 had adalimumab and methotrexate). At 6 months, ACR50 response was attained in 147 (38%) of 384 patients with tofacitinib monotherapy, 173 (46%) of 376 patients with tofacitinib and methotrexate, and 169 (44%) of 386 patients with adalimumab and methotrexate. Non-inferiority was declared for tofacitinib and methotrexate versus adalimumab and methotrexate (difference 2% [98·34% CI −6 to 11]) but not for tofacitinib monotherapy versus either adalimumab and methotrexate (−6 [−14 to 3]) or tofacitinib and methotrexate (−8 [−16 to 1]). In total, 23 (6%) of 384 patients receiving tofacitinib monotherapy, 26 (7%) of 376 patients receiving tofacitinib plus methotrexate, and 36 (9%) of 386 patients receiving adalimumab plus methotrexate discontinued due to adverse events. Two (1%) of the 384 patients receiving tofacitinib monotherapy died. No new or unexpected safety issues were reported for either treatment in this study for up to 1 year.
Tofacitinib and methotrexate combination therapy was non-inferior to adalimumab and methotrexate combination therapy in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in patients with an inadequate response to methotrexate in this trial. Tofacitinib monotherapy was not shown to be non-inferior to either combination.
Pfizer Inc.
Journal Article
Two Phase 3, Randomized, Controlled Trials of Ruxolitinib Cream for Vitiligo
by
Wolkerstorfer, Albert
,
Kornacki, Deanna
,
Ruer-Mulard, Mireille
in
Acne
,
Acne Vulgaris - chemically induced
,
Administration, Topical
2022
Vitiligo is a chronic autoimmune disease that causes skin depigmentation. A cream formulation of ruxolitinib (an inhibitor of Janus kinase 1 and 2) resulted in repigmentation in a phase 2 trial involving adults with vitiligo.
We conducted two phase 3, double-blind, vehicle-controlled trials (Topical Ruxolitinib Evaluation in Vitiligo Study 1 [TRuE-V1] and 2 [TRuE-V2]) in North America and Europe that involved patients 12 years of age or older who had nonsegmental vitiligo with depigmentation covering 10% or less of total body-surface area. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to apply 1.5% ruxolitinib cream or vehicle control twice daily for 24 weeks to all vitiligo areas on the face and body, after which all patients could apply 1.5% ruxolitinib cream through week 52. The primary end point was a decrease (improvement) of at least 75% from baseline in the facial Vitiligo Area Scoring Index (F-VASI; range, 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating a greater area of facial depigmentation), or F-VASI75 response, at week 24. There were five key secondary end points, including improved responses on the Vitiligo Noticeability Scale.
A total of 674 patients were enrolled, 330 in TRuE-V1 and 344 in TRuE-V2. In TRuE-V1, the percentage of patients with an F-VASI75 response at week 24 was 29.8% in the ruxolitinib-cream group and 7.4% in the vehicle group (relative risk, 4.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9 to 8.4; P<0.001). In TRuE-V2, the percentages were 30.9% and 11.4%, respectively (relative risk, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.5 to 4.9; P<0.001). The results for key secondary end points showed superiority of ruxolitinib cream over vehicle control. Among patients who applied ruxolitinib cream throughout 52 weeks, adverse events occurred in 54.8% in TRuE-V1 and 62.3% in TRuE-V2; the most common adverse events were application-site acne (6.3% and 6.6%, respectively), nasopharyngitis (5.4% and 6.1%), and application-site pruritus (5.4% and 5.3%).
In two phase 3 trials, application of ruxolitinib cream resulted in greater repigmentation of vitiligo lesions than vehicle control through 52 weeks, but it was associated with acne and pruritus at the application site. Larger and longer trials are required to determine the effect and safety of ruxolitinib cream in patients with vitiligo. (Funded by Incyte; TRuE-V1 and TRuE-V2 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT04052425 and NCT04057573.).
Journal Article
Efficacy and safety of abrocitinib in adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (JADE MONO-1): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial
by
Maari, Catherine
,
Aschoff, Roland
,
Thyssen, Jacob P
in
Administration, Oral
,
Adolescent
,
Adolescents
2020
Abrocitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase 1 inhibitor, was effective and well tolerated in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in a phase 2b trial. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of abrocitinib monotherapy in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis.
In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial (JADE MONO-1), patients (aged ≥12 years) with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (Investigator Global Assessment score ≥3, Eczema Area and Severity Index [EASI] score ≥16, percentage of body surface area affected ≥10%, and Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale score ≥4) with a bodyweight of 40 kg or more, were enrolled at 69 sites in Australia, Canada, Europe, and the USA. Patients were randomly assigned (2:2:1) to oral abrocitinib 100 mg, abrocitinib 200 mg, or placebo once daily for 12 weeks. Randomisation was done using an interactive response technology system, stratified by baseline disease severity and age. Patients, investigators, and the funder of the study were masked to study treatment. The coprimary endpoints were the proportion of patients who had achieved an Investigator Global Assessment response (score of 0 [clear] or 1 [almost clear] with a ≥2-grade improvement from baseline), and the proportion of patients who achieved at least a 75% improvement in EASI score from baseline (EASI-75) score, both assessed at week 12. Efficacy was assessed in the full analysis set, which included all randomised patients who received at least one dose of study medication. Safety was assessed in all randomised patients. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03349060.
Between Dec 7, 2017, and March 26, 2019, 387 patients were enrolled: 156 were assigned to abrocitinib 100 mg, 154 to abrocitinib 200 mg, and 77 to placebo. All enrolled patients received at least one dose of study treatment and thus were evaluable for 12-week efficacy. Of the patients with available data for the coprimary endpoints at week 12, the proportion of patients who had achieved an Investigator Global Assessment response was significantly higher in the abrocitinib 100 mg group than in the placebo group (37 [24%] of 156 patients vs six [8%] of 76 patients; p=0·0037) and in the abrocitinib 200 mg group compared with the placebo group (67 [44%] of 153 patients vs six [8%] of 76 patients; p<0·0001). Of the patients with available data for the coprimary endpoints at week 12, compared with the placebo group, the proportion of patients who had achieved an EASI-75 response was significantly higher in the abrocitinib 100 mg group (62 [40%] of 156 patients vs nine [12%] of 76 patients; p<0·0001) and abrocitinib 200 mg group (96 [63%] of 153 patients vs nine [12%] of 76 patients; p<0·0001). Adverse events were reported in 108 (69%) of 156 patients in the abrocitinib 100 mg group, 120 (78%) of 154 patients in the abrocitinib 200 mg group, and 44 (57%) of 77 patients in the placebo group. Serious adverse events were reported in five (3%) of 156 patients in the abrocitinib 100 mg group, five (3%) of 154 patients in the abrocitinib 200 mg group, and three (4%) of 77 patients in the placebo group. No treatment-related deaths were reported.
Monotherapy with oral abrocitinib once daily was effective and well tolerated in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis.
Pfizer.
Journal Article
Abrocitinib versus Placebo or Dupilumab for Atopic Dermatitis
2021
In a trial comparing abrocitinib with placebo and dupilumab, IGA and EASI-75 responses were better with abrocitinib than with placebo at 12 weeks. Itch response at 2 weeks was better with the 200-mg dose of abrocitinib than with dupilumab, but neither abrocitinib dose differed significantly from dupilumab in most other key secondary end-point comparisons at week 16.
Journal Article