Androstadienes

雄雌二醇
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    在雌激素受体(ER)阳性乳腺癌的治疗中建立了抗雌激素疗法。然而,为了克服耐药性并改善治疗效果,需要新的策略,例如针对广泛认可的异常表观遗传学.本研究旨在探讨芳香化酶抑制剂依西美坦和组蛋白去乙酰化酶(HDAC)抑制剂和抗氧化剂α-硫辛酸在ER阳性乳腺癌细胞中的联合作用。首先,α-硫辛酸的对映体和外消旋混合物,研究了rac-二氢-硫辛酸对HDAC的抑制作用。我们发现HDAC抑制活性在1-3位数微摩尔范围内,优选HDAC6。Rac-二氢-硫辛酸比rac-α-硫辛酸略强。α-硫辛酸的抗增殖IC50值在3位数微摩尔范围内。值得注意的是,依西美坦和α-硫辛酸的组合在不同的孵育时间(24h至10d)和读数(MTT,活细胞荧光显微镜,半胱天冬酶激活)通过Chou-Talalay方法分析。α-硫辛酸增加线粒体融合和凋亡相关蛋白p21、APAF-1、BIM、FOXO1,并降低抗凋亡蛋白survivin的表达,BCL-2和c-myc。总之,联合使用依西美坦和α-硫辛酸是ER阳性乳腺癌的一种有前景的新型治疗选择.
    Anti-estrogenic therapy is established in the management of estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer. However, to overcome resistance and improve therapeutic outcome, novel strategies are needed such as targeting widely recognized aberrant epigenetics. The study aims to investigate the combination of the aromatase inhibitor exemestane and the histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitor and antioxidant α-lipoic acid in ER-positive breast cancer cells. First, the enantiomers and the racemic mixture of α-lipoic acid, and rac-dihydro-lipoic acid were investigated for HDAC inhibition. We found HDAC inhibitory activity in the 1-3-digit micromolar range with a preference for HDAC6. Rac-dihydro-lipoic acid is slightly more potent than rac-α-lipoic acid. The antiproliferative IC50 value of α-lipoic acid is in the 3-digit micromolar range. Notably, the combination of exemestane and α-lipoic acid resulted in synergistic behavior under various incubation times (24 h to 10 d) and readouts (MTT, live-cell fluorescence microscopy, caspase activation) analyzed by the Chou-Talalay method. α-lipoic acid increases mitochondrial fusion and the expression of apoptosis-related proteins p21, APAF-1, BIM, FOXO1, and decreases expression of anti-apoptotic proteins survivin, BCL-2, and c-myc. In conclusion, combining exemestane with α-lipoic acid is a promising novel treatment option for ER-positive breast cancer.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:以前的研究报道,使用吸入糖皮质激素加福莫特罗维持和缓解治疗(MART)的哮喘患者可降低急性加重率并改善症状控制。糠酸氟替卡松(FF)和维兰特罗(VIL)也提供快速支气管扩张和持续的抗炎作用,然而,没有研究调查FF/VIL作为哮喘控制的MART。
    方法:从2021年10月1日至2023年9月30日,这项回顾性研究纳入了根据全球哮喘倡议指南分类为第3步或第4步的哮喘患者,然后被分成两组。一组以MART的身份接受BUD/FOR,而另一个收到FF/VIL作为MART。肺功能检查,恶化率,哮喘控制测试(ACT),呼出气一氧化氮(FeNO)水平,治疗前和治疗12个月后测定血嗜酸性粒细胞计数。
    结果:共纳入161例患者,其中36人每天两次作为MART接受BUD/FOR,125人每天接受一次FF/VIL作为MART。经过12个月的治疗,FF/VIL组ACT评分显著增加1.57(p<0.001),而BUD/FOR组增加了0.88(p=0.11)。在FeNO水平方面,BUD/FOR组下降了-0.2ppb(p=0.98),而FF/VIL组轻度增加+0.8ppb(p=0.7)。值得注意的是,两组之间的FeNO变化有显着差异(ΔFeNO:BUD/FOR-0.2ppb;FF/VIL-0.8ppb,p<0.001)。FEV1、血液嗜酸性粒细胞计数无明显改变,或两组急性加重下降。
    结论:在当前的研究中,接受FF/VIL作为MART治疗的患者ACT评分改善,而用BUD/FOR作为MART治疗的患者表现出FeNO水平的降低。然而,两个治疗组之间的差异未达到临床意义。因此,作为MART的FF/VIL显示出与作为MART的BUD/FOR相似的有效性。
    BACKGROUND: Previous studies have reported reduced acute exacerbation rates and improved symptom control in asthma patients treated using inhaled corticosteroids plus formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy (MART). Fluticasone furoate (FF) and vilanterol (VIL) also provide rapid bronchodilation and sustained anti-inflammatory effects, however no studies have investigated FF/VIL as MART for asthma control.
    METHODS: From October 1, 2021 to September 30, 2023, this retrospective study included asthma patients classified as step 3 or 4 according to the Global Initiative for Asthma guidelines, who were then divided into two groups. One group received BUD/FOR as MART, while the other received FF/VIL as MART. Pulmonary function tests, exacerbation rates, Asthma Control Test (ACT), fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) levels, and blood eosinophil counts were measured before and after 12 months of treatment.
    RESULTS: A total of 161 patients were included, of whom 36 received BUD/FOR twice daily as MART, and 125 received FF/VIL once daily as MART. After 12 months of treatment, the FF/VIL group showed a significant increase in ACT scores by 1.57 (p < 0.001), while the BUD/FOR group had an increase of 0.88 (p = 0.11). In terms of FeNO levels, the BUD/FOR group experienced a decline of -0.2 ppb (p = 0.98), whereas the FF/VIL group had a mild increase of + 0.8 ppb (p = 0.7). Notably, there was a significant difference in the change of FeNO between the two groups (∆ FeNO: -0.2 ppb in BUD/FOR; + 0.8 ppb in FF/VIL, p < 0.001). There were no significant alterations observed in FEV1, blood eosinophil count, or acute exacerbation decline in either group.
    CONCLUSIONS: In the current study, patients treated with FF/VIL as MART showed improvements in ACT scores, while those treated with BUD/FOR as MART exhibited a reduction in FeNO levels. However, the difference between the two treatment groups did not reach clinical significance. Thus, FF/VIL as MART showed similar effectiveness to BUD/FOR as MART.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:这项成本效用分析从魁北克社会的角度评估了糠酸氟替卡松/灭替溴铵/维兰特罗(FF/UMEC/VI)三联疗法与FF/VI或UMEC/VI治疗的长期临床和经济效益。
    方法:使用经过验证的GALAXY疾病进展模型,参数设置为基线,疗效数据来自IMPACT。治疗费用(2017加元[C$])是使用魁北克特定的单位成本估算的。费用和健康结果以1.5%/年折扣。支付意愿阈值为50,000加元/质量调整生命年(QALY)被认为是具有成本效益的。结果模型是恶化率,QALYs,生命年(LYs),成本和增量成本效益比(ICER)。根据之前的治疗进行亚组分析,前一年的恶化史,和基线肺功能。
    结果:在一生中,FF/UMEC/VI获得了更多的QALY和LYs,与FF/VI和UMEC/VI相比,增量成本较小。从社会的角度来看,基本情况下的估计ICER为18,152加元/季度vsFF/VI,和15847加元/季度对UMEC/VI。对于亚组分析(FF/UMEC/VI与FF/VI和UMEC/VI相比),ICERs范围为:C$17,412-25,664/QALY和C$16,493-18,663/QALY(先前治疗);C$15,247-19,924/QALY和C$15,444-28,859/QALY(恶化史);C$14,025-34,154/QALY和C$16,083-17,509
    结论:FF/UMEC/VI在基础病例和所有亚组分析中相对于两个比较者而言,预测可改善结局并具有成本效益。基于这一分析,将是魁北克卫生服务基金的适当投资。
    背景:影响试验NCT02164513。
    BACKGROUND: This cost-utility analysis assessed the long-term clinical and economic benefits of fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) triple therapy vs FF/VI or UMEC/VI from a Quebec societal perspective in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with ≥1 moderate/severe exacerbation in the previous year.
    METHODS: The validated GALAXY disease progression model was utilized, with parameters set to baseline and efficacy data from IMPACT. Treatment costs (2017 Canadian dollars [C$]) were estimated using Quebec-specific unit costs. Costs and health outcomes were discounted at 1.5 %/year. A willingness-to-pay threshold of C$50,000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) was considered cost-effective. Outcomes modeled were exacerbation rates, QALYs, life years (LYs), costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Subgroup analyses were performed according to prior treatment, exacerbation history in the previous year, and baseline lung function.
    RESULTS: Over a lifetime horizon, FF/UMEC/VI resulted in more QALYs and LYs gained, at a small incremental cost compared with FF/VI and UMEC/VI. From a societal perspective, the estimated ICER for the base case was C$18,152/QALY vs FF/VI, and C$15,847/QALY vs UMEC/VI. For the subgroup analyses (FF/UMEC/VI compared with FF/VI and UMEC/VI), ICERs ranged from: C$17,412-25,664/QALY and C$16,493-18,663/QALY (prior treatment); C$15,247-19,924/QALY and C$15,444-28,859/QALY (exacerbation history); C$14,025-34,154/QALY and C$16,083-17,509/QALY (baseline lung function).
    CONCLUSIONS: FF/UMEC/VI was predicted to improve outcomes and be cost-effective vs both comparators in the base case and all subgroup analyses, and based on this analysis would be an appropriate investment of health service funds in Quebec.
    BACKGROUND: IMPACT trial NCT02164513.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:ASCO/美国病理学家学会指南建议报告雌激素受体(ER)和孕激素受体(PgR)呈阳性(1%-100%)染色。统计标准化的定量阳性可能表明阳性与乳腺癌预后的差异关联。
    方法:MA.27(ClinicalTrials.gov标识符:NCT00066573)是依西美坦与阿那曲唑在绝经后早期乳腺癌妇女中的III期辅助试验。免疫化学ER和PgRHSCORE和阳性百分比(%)通过机器图像定量进行集中评估,并在Box-Cox方差稳定转换后对ER的平方进行统计学标准化为平均值0和标准偏差(SD)1;对于PgR,(1)自然对数(0.1加0HSCOREs和0%+)和(2)平方根。我们的主要终点是在中位4.1年随访时MA.27远端无病生存率(DDFS),次要终点为无事件生存期(EFS).用Kaplan-Meier图描述了在SD处的切点平均为0(≤-1;(-1,0];(0,1];>1)的单变量生存率,并用Wilcoxon(Peto-Prentice)检验统计量。调整后的Cox多变量回归具有双侧Wald检验和名义显著性P<.05。
    结果:在7,576名妇女中,3,048例女性肿瘤具有机器定量图像分析结果:2,900(95%)的ER,2,726(89%)用于PgR,和2,582(3,048的85%)同时患有ER和PgR。较高的统计学标准化ER和PgRHSCORE和%+与较好的单变量DDFS和EFS相关(P<.001)。在多变量评估中,在PgR模型中,ERHSCORE和%+与DDFS没有显着相关(P=.52-.88),而在ER模型中,较高的PgRHSCORE和%+与较好的DDFS显著相关(P=.001)。
    结论:辅助统计标准化区分ER和PgR的定量水平。ER和PgR标准化单位较高的患者的DDFS优于HSCORE和%≤-1的患者。
    OBJECTIVE: ASCO/College of American Pathologists guidelines recommend reporting estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) as positive with (1%-100%) staining. Statistically standardized quantitated positivity could indicate differential associations of positivity with breast cancer outcomes.
    METHODS: MA.27 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00066573) was a phase III adjuvant trial of exemestane versus anastrozole in postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer. Immunochemistry ER and PgR HSCORE and % positivity (%+) were centrally assessed by machine image quantitation and statistically standardized to mean 0 and standard deviation (SD) 1 after Box-Cox variance stabilization transformations of square for ER; for PgR, (1) natural logarithm (0.1 added to 0 HSCOREs and 0%+) and (2) square root. Our primary end point was MA.27 distant disease-free survival (DDFS) at a median 4.1-year follow-up, and secondary end point was event-free survival (EFS). Univariate survival with cut points at SDs about a mean of 0 (≤-1; (-1, 0]; (0, 1]; >1) was described with Kaplan-Meier plots and examined with Wilcoxon (Peto-Prentice) test statistic. Adjusted Cox multivariable regressions had two-sided Wald tests and nominal significance P < .05.
    RESULTS: Of 7,576 women accrued, 3,048 women\'s tumors had machine-quantitated image analysis results: 2,900 (95%) for ER, 2,726 (89%) for PgR, and 2,582 (85% of 3,048) with both ER and PgR. Higher statistically standardized ER and PgR HSCORE and %+ were associated with better univariate DDFS and EFS (P < .001). In multivariable assessments, ER HSCORE and %+ were not significantly associated (P = .52-.88) with DDFS in models with PgR, whereas higher PgR HSCORE and %+ were significantly associated with better DDFS (P = .001) in models with ER.
    CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive statistical standardization differentiated quantitated levels of ER and PgR. Patients with higher ER- and PgR-standardized units had superior DDFS compared with those with HSCOREs and %+ ≤-1.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:在日本,评估哮喘患者吸入皮质类固醇/长效毒蕈碱拮抗剂/长效β2激动剂(ICS/LAMA/LABA)三联疗法特征的实际数据有限。
    方法:描述性,新开始单或多吸入三联疗法的年龄≥15岁的哮喘患者的观察性研究(SITT:糠酸氟替卡松/灭克地铵/维兰特罗[FF/UMEC/VI],SITT:茚达特罗/格隆溴铵/糠酸莫米松[IND/GLY/MF或MITT)或ICS/LABA使用JMDC/MedicalDataVision(MDV)健康保险数据库,从2021年2月至2022年2月(首次处方日期:索引日期)。患者被分配到三个非相互排斥的队列:A)新的FF/UMEC/VI发起者;B)新的FF/UMEC/VI,IND/GLY/MF,或MITT引发剂;C)新的FF/UMEC/VI,IND/GLY/MF,MITT或ICS/LABA引发剂作为初始维持疗法(IMT)。在治疗开始前12个月(基线期)对患者特征进行描述性评估。
    结果:队列A:在新的FF/UMEC/VI引发剂中,12.8%和0.1%(JMDC)以及21.7%和0.9%(MDV)的患者出现≥1次中度和重度加重;52.0%(JMDC)和79.2%(MDV)使用ICS/LABA。队列B:大多数患者开始FF/UMEC/VI和IND/GLY/MF超过MITT(JMDC:91.3%vs8.7%;MDV:67.8%vs32.2%),减少恶化和较低的救护药物使用。队列C:作为IMT的FF/UMEC/VI引发剂的比例更高,与作为IMT的ICS/LABA引发剂相比,指数中度加重(JMDC:17.8%对10.7%;MDV:8.0%对5.1%)。
    结论:治疗组之间的患者特征大致相似;SITT发起者比MITT发起者有更少的恶化和更低的救护药物使用,由SITT与MITT发起者中IMT的比例更大。医生可能会规定三重双重疗法作为IMT以应对恶化。
    BACKGROUND: Real-world data assessing characteristics of patients with asthma initiating inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-agonist (ICS/LAMA/LABA) triple therapy in Japan are limited.
    METHODS: Descriptive, observational study of patients with asthma aged ≥15 years newly initiating single- or multiple-inhaler triple therapy (SITT: fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol [FF/UMEC/VI], SITT: indacaterol/glycopyrronium bromide/mometasone furoate [IND/GLY/MF] or MITT) or ICS/LABA using JMDC/Medical Data Vision (MDV) health insurance databases from February 2021-February 2022 (first prescription date: index date). Patients were assigned to three non-mutually exclusive cohorts: A) new FF/UMEC/VI initiators; B) new FF/UMEC/VI, IND/GLY/MF, or MITT initiators; C) new FF/UMEC/VI, IND/GLY/MF, MITT or ICS/LABA initiators as initial maintenance therapy (IMT). Patient characteristics were assessed descriptively for 12-months pre-treatment initiation (baseline period).
    RESULTS: Cohort A: among new FF/UMEC/VI initiators, 12.8% and 0.1% (JMDC) and 21.7% and 0.9% (MDV) of patients had ≥1 moderate and severe exacerbation; 52.0% (JMDC) and 79.2% (MDV) had ICS/LABA use. Cohort B: most patients initiated FF/UMEC/VI and IND/GLY/MF over MITT (JMDC: 91.3% vs 8.7%; MDV: 67.8% vs 32.2%), with fewer exacerbations and lower rescue medication use. Cohort C: a greater proportion of FF/UMEC/VI initiators as IMT experienced a moderate exacerbation at index versus ICS/LABA initiators as IMT (JMDC: 17.8% vs 10.7%; MDV: 8.0% vs 5.1%).
    CONCLUSIONS: Patient characteristics were generally similar between treatment groups; SITT initiators had fewer exacerbations and lower rescue medication use than MITT initiators, represented by the greater proportion of IMT among SITT versus MITT initiators. Physicians may have prescribed triple over dual therapy as IMT in response to an exacerbation.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:与多吸入器三联疗法(MITT)相比,采用糠酸氟替卡松/灭克地铵/维兰特罗(FF/UMEC/VI)的单吸入三联疗法(SITT)在慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)评估测试评分方面表现出肺功能改善和有意义的改善.这项真实世界研究通过评估COPD加重率,比较了将英格兰COPD患者从MITT转换为每日一次SITT与FF/UMEC/VI的有效性。医疗保健资源使用(HCRU)和相关的直接医疗费用。
    方法:使用关联的初级保健电子健康记录和二级保健管理数据集进行回顾性队列研究。年龄≥35岁诊断为COPD的患者,有吸烟史,纳入了转换前12个月和转换至FF/UMEC/VI后6个月的二级护理数据和连续GP注册.索引日期是在2017年11月15日至2019年9月30日MITT使用后立即开始FF/UMEC/VI处方。基线是指数前12个月,转换前和转换后6/12个月评估结果,并按既往COPD加重状态分层。
    结果:我们纳入了2533例患者(平均[SD]年龄:71.1[9.9]岁;52.1%为男性)。在转换后的6个月里,出现≥1中度至重度患者的比例显着下降(36.2%-28.9%),仅中度(24.4%-19.8%)和仅重度(15.4%-11.8%)COPD加重(每个,p<0.0001)与6个月切换前相比。正如比率所证明的那样,各严重程度的总体加重率(p<0.01)和既往有加重的患者的加重率均显著降低(p<0.0001).在同一时期,各项COPD相关HRU的发生率和COPD相关总费用均显著下降(-24.9%;p<0.0001).
    结论:在初级护理环境中,COPD患者从MITT转换为每日一次SITT并使用FF/UMEC/VI,中度和重度加重明显减少,并降低与COPD相关的HCCU和成本,在6个月后切换与6个月前切换相比。
    BACKGROUND: Compared with multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT), single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) with fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) demonstrated improved lung function and meaningful improvements in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) Assessment Test score. This real-world study compared the effectiveness of switching patients with COPD in England from MITT to once-daily SITT with FF/UMEC/VI by evaluating rates of COPD exacerbation, healthcare resource use (HCRU) and associated direct medical costs.
    METHODS: Retrospective cohort pre-post study using linked primary care electronic health record and secondary care administrative datasets. Patients diagnosed with COPD at age ≥35 years, with smoking history, linkage to secondary care data and continuous GP registration for 12 months pre-switch and 6 months post-switch to FF/UMEC/VI were included. Index date was the first initiation of an FF/UMEC/VI prescription immediately following MITT use from 15 November 2017 to 30 September 2019. Baseline was 12 months prior to index, with outcomes assessed 6/12 months pre-switch and post-switch, and stratified by prior COPD exacerbation status.
    RESULTS: We included 2533 patients (mean [SD] age: 71.1 [9.9] years; 52.1% male). In the 6 months post-switch, there were significant decreases in the proportion of patients experiencing ≥1 moderate-to-severe (36.2%-28.9%), moderate only (24.4%-19.8%) and severe only (15.4%-11.8%) COPD exacerbation (each, p<0.0001) compared with the 6 months pre-switch. As demonstrated by rate ratios, there were significant reductions in exacerbation rates of each severity overall (p<0.01) and among patients with prior exacerbations (p<0.0001). In the same period, there were significant decreases in the rate of each COPD-related HCRU and total COPD-related costs (-24.9%; p<0.0001).
    CONCLUSIONS: Patients with COPD switching from MITT to once-daily SITT with FF/UMEC/VI in a primary care setting had significantly fewer moderate and severe exacerbations, and lower COPD-related HCRU and costs, in the 6 months post-switch compared with the 6 months pre-switch.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    本研究旨在探讨高剂量吸入糖皮质激素(ICS)对慢性咳嗽患者呼出气一氧化氮(FeNO)水平升高的影响。在一项前瞻性研究中,患有慢性咳嗽和FeNO≥25ppb的成年人,没有任何其他明显的病因,接受糠酸氟替卡松(200微克)治疗三周。使用FeNO水平评估结果,咳嗽严重程度,和治疗前后的莱斯特咳嗽问卷(LCQ)。在50名参与者中(平均年龄:58.4岁;58%为女性),治疗应答率(LCQ增加≥1.3点)为68%,治疗后咳嗽和LCQ评分以及FeNO水平显着改善。然而,咳嗽的改善与FeNO水平的变化无显著相关性.这些发现支持在慢性咳嗽和FeNO水平升高的成人中进行短期ICS试验的指南建议。但是FeNO水平与咳嗽之间缺乏相关性,这引起了人们对它们之间直接机制联系的疑问。
    This study aimed to investigate the effects of high-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) on chronic cough patients with elevated fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) levels. In a prospective study, adults with chronic cough and FeNO ≥ 25 ppb, without any other apparent etiology, received fluticasone furoate (200 mcg) for three weeks. Outcomes were evaluated using FeNO levels, cough severity, and Leicester Cough Questionnaire (LCQ) before and after treatment. Of the fifty participants (average age: 58.4 years; 58% female), the treatment responder rate (≥ 1.3-point increase in LCQ) was 68%, with a significant improvement in cough and LCQ scores and FeNO levels post-treatment. However, improvements in cough did not significantly correlate with changes in FeNO levels. These findings support the guideline recommendations for a short-term ICS trial in adults with chronic cough and elevated FeNO levels, but the lack of correlations between FeNO levels and cough raises questions about their direct mechanistic link.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:建议在GOLDB患者中使用LABA/LAMA治疗。我们假设三联疗法(LABA/LAMA/ICS)在实现和维持临床控制(CC)方面优于LABA/LAMA。在GOLDB患者亚组(此处称为GOLDB+患者)中考虑影响和疾病稳定性的复合结局,其特征在于:(1)尽管接受常规LABA/LAMA治疗,但仍有症状(CAT≥10);(2)在过去一年中经历过一次中度加重;(3)血液嗜酸性粒细胞计数(BEC)≥150个细胞/μL.
    方法:ANTESB+研究是一项前瞻性研究,多中心,开放标签,随机化,务实,旨在检验这一假设的对照试验。它将随机分配1028名B患者,以继续使用其主治医师开具的常规LABA/LAMA组合,或开始使用氟替卡松糠酸酯(FF)92μg/umecidinium(UMEC)55μg/维兰特罗(VI)22μg在单个吸入器q.d中进行12个月。主要疗效结果将是达到的CC水平。次要结果包括临床重要恶化指数(CID),年恶化率,和FEV1。探索目标包括BEC和吸烟状况的相互作用,全因死亡率和LABA/LAMA臂上切换治疗臂的患者比例。安全性分析包括不良事件和肺炎发生率。
    结果:首例患者于2024年2月29日招募;结果预计在2026年第一季度。
    结论:ANTESB+研究是第一个:(1)探索三联疗法在B+COPD患者人群中的疗效和安全性;(2)使用综合指数(CC)作为COPD试验的主要结果。
    BACKGROUND: Treatment with LABA/LAMA is recommended in GOLD B patients. We hypothesized that triple therapy (LABA/LAMA/ICS) will be superior to LABA/LAMA in achieving and maintaining clinical control (CC), a composite outcome that considers both impact and disease stability in a subgroup of GOLD B patients (here termed GOLD B+ patients) characterized by: (1) remaining symptomatic (CAT≥10) despite regular LABA/LAMA therapy; (2) having suffered one moderate exacerbation in the previous year; and (3) having blood eosinophil counts (BEC) ≥150cells/μL.
    METHODS: The ANTES B+ study is a prospective, multicenter, open label, randomized, pragmatic, controlled trial designed to test this hypothesis. It will randomize 1028 B+ patients to continue with their usual LABA/LAMA combination prescribed by their attending physician or to begin fluticasone furoate (FF) 92μg/umeclidinium (UMEC) 55μg/vilanterol (VI) 22μg in a single inhaler q.d. for 12 months. The primary efficacy outcome will be the level of CC achieved. Secondary outcomes include the clinical important deterioration index (CID), annual rate of exacerbations, and FEV1. Exploratory objectives include the interaction of BEC and smoking status, all-cause mortality and proportion of patients on LABA/LAMA arm that switch therapy arms. Safety analysis include adverse events and incidence of pneumonia.
    RESULTS: The first patient was recruited on February 29, 2024; results are expected in the first quarter of 2026.
    CONCLUSIONS: The ANTES B+ study is the first to: (1) explore the efficacy and safety of triple therapy in a population of B+ COPD patients and (2) use a composite index (CC) as the primary result of a COPD trial.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:依维莫司联合内分泌治疗(ET)以前被批准为非类固醇芳香化酶抑制剂(NSAI)期间或之后进展的HR(+)/HER2(-)晚期乳腺癌(aBC)患者(pts)的二线治疗。自批准以来,ABC的治疗景观发生了巨大的变化,特别是随着CDK4-6抑制剂的到来。进展为CDK4/6抑制剂后的内分泌单一疗法显示出有限的无进展生存期(PFS),三个月以下。在CDK4/6抑制剂后,依维莫司加ET疗效的证据很少。
    方法:对2015年2月至2022年12月在西班牙4家医院接受依维莫司和ET治疗超过CDK4/6-i进展的aBC患者进行了回顾性观察性研究。从医疗记录中收集临床和人口统计学数据。主要目标是估计中位无进展生存期(mPFS)。记录依维莫司不良事件(AE)。用中位数总结定量变量;用比例和Kaplan-Meier方法进行生存估计的定性变量。
    结果:一百六十一名患者在使用CDK4/6抑制剂后接受了依维莫司加ET(依西美坦:96,氟维司群:54,他莫昔芬:10,未知:1)。中位随访时间为15个月(四分位距:1-56个月)。诊断时的中位年龄为49岁(范围:35-90岁)。估计mPFS为6.0个月(95CI5.3-7.8个月)。以前使用CDK4/6抑制剂治疗持续>18个月的患者的PFS更长(8.7个月,95CI6.6-11.3个月),在无内脏转移的患者中(8.0个月,95CI5.8-10.5个月),和化疗-在转移情况下幼稚(7.2个月,95CI5.9-8.4个月)。
    结论:本回顾性分析队列依维莫司联合ET治疗之前接受CDK4/6抑制剂治疗的mBC患者,与从当前随机临床数据获得的ET单药治疗的mPFS相比,估计mPFS更长。在新型临床试验设计中,依维莫司加ET可被视为有效的对照臂。
    OBJECTIVE: Everolimus in combination with endocrine therapy (ET) was formerly approved as 2nd-line therapy in HR(+)/HER2(-) advanced breast cancer (aBC) patients (pts) progressing during or after a non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI). Since this approval, the treatment landscape of aBC has changed dramatically, particularly with the arrival of CDK 4-6 inhibitors. Endocrine monotherapy after progression to CDK4/6 inhibitors has shown a limited progression-free survival (PFS), below 3 months. Evidence of the efficacy of everolimus plus ET after CDK4/6 inhibitors is scarce.
    METHODS: A retrospective observational study of patients with aBC treated with everolimus and ET beyond CDK4/6-i progression compiled from February 2015 to December 2022 in 4 Spanish hospitals was performed. Clinical and demographic data were collected from medical records. The main objective was to estimate the median progression-free survival (mPFS). Everolimus adverse events (AE) were registered. Quantitative variables were summarized with medians; qualitative variables with proportions and the Kaplan-Meier method were used for survival estimates.
    RESULTS: One hundred sixty-one patients received everolimus plus ET (exemestane: 96, fulvestrant: 54, tamoxifen: 10, unknown: 1) after progressing on a CDK4/6 inhibitor. The median follow-up time was 15 months (interquartile range: 1-56 months). The median age at diagnosis was 49 years (range: 35-90 years). The estimated mPFS was 6.0 months (95%CI 5.3-7.8 months). PFS was longer in patients with previous CDK4/6 inhibitor therapy lasting for > 18 months (8.7 months, 95%CI 6.6-11.3 months), in patients w/o visceral metastases (8.0 months, 95%CI 5.8-10.5 months), and chemotherapy-naïve in the metastatic setting (7.2 months, 95%CI 5.9-8.4 months).
    CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis cohort of everolimus plus ET in mBC patients previously treated with a CDK4/6 inhibitor suggests a longer estimated mPFS when compared with the mPFS with ET monotherapy obtained from current randomized clinical data. Everolimus plus ET may be considered as a valid control arm in novel clinical trial designs.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:芳香化酶抑制剂来曲唑和芳香化酶灭活剂依西美坦是两种最关键的癌症药物,用于内分泌治疗ER阳性乳腺癌。尽管这两种药物都能抑制CYP19(芳香化酶),并且已经使用了数十年,直接头对头,患者内部交叉比较他们在体内减少雌激素合成的能力仍然缺乏.
    方法:适合新辅助内分泌治疗的绝经后乳腺癌患者随机接受来曲唑(2.5mgo.d.)或依西美坦(25mgo.d.)的初始治疗期,随后是替代药物的第二个治疗期(患者内部交叉研究设计)。血清雌酮水平(E1),雌二醇(E2),来曲唑,依西美坦,和17-羟基依西美坦同时使用一种新的,本实验室建立了超灵敏的LC-MS/MS方法。
    结果:可从79例患者获得全套血清样本(基线和使用来曲唑或依西美坦治疗期间),包括从来曲唑开始的40例患者(队列1)和依西美坦开始的39例患者(队列2)。队列1中的平均血清雌酮和雌二醇水平在基线时为174pmol/L和46.4pmol/L,分别。来曲唑治疗抑制血清E1和E2至平均值0.2pmol/L和0.4pmol/L(P<0.001)。换到依西美坦之后,E1和E2的平均血清水平增加到1.4pmol/L和0.7pmol/L,分别。在队列2中,E1和E2的基线平均血清水平分别为159和32.5pmol/L,分别。用依西美坦处理将E1的这些值降至1.8pmol/L,E2的这些值降至0.6pmol/L(P<0.001)。在交叉到来曲唑之后,E1和E2的平均血清水平进一步显着降低至0.1pmol/L和0.4pmol/L,分别。在整个治疗过程中监测所有患者的血清药物水平,并确认所有患者对方案的依从性和药物浓度在治疗范围内。此外,两种芳香化酶抑制剂治疗期间Ki-67值显著下降,对肥胖女性表现出更强的抑制作用。
    结论:据我们所知,我们在这里第一次提出了一个全面和直接的头对头,芳香化酶抑制剂来曲唑和芳香化酶灭活剂依西美坦在体内抑制血清雌激素水平方面的患者间交叉比较.总而言之,我们的结果清楚地表明,与依西美坦相比,来曲唑治疗可更显著地抑制血清E1和E2水平.
    OBJECTIVE: The aromatase inhibitor letrozole and the aromatase inactivator exemestane are two of the most pivotal cancer drugs used for endocrine treatment of ER-positive breast cancer in all phases of the disease. Although both drugs inhibit CYP19 (aromatase) and have been used for decades, a direct head-to-head, intra-patient-cross-over comparison of their ability to decrease estrogen synthesis in vivo is still lacking.
    METHODS: Postmenopausal breast cancer patients suitable for neoadjuvant endocrine therapy were randomized to receive either letrozole (2.5 mg o.d.) or exemestane (25 mg o.d.) for an initial treatment period, followed by a second treatment period on the alternative drug (intra-patient cross-over study design). Serum levels of estrone (E1), estradiol (E2), letrozole, exemestane, and 17-hydroxyexemestane were quantified simultaneously using a novel, ultrasensitive LC-MS/MS method established in our laboratory.
    RESULTS: Complete sets of serum samples (baseline and during treatment with letrozole or exemestane) were available from 79 patients, including 40 patients starting with letrozole (cohort 1) and 39 with exemestane (cohort 2). Mean serum estrone and estradiol levels in cohort 1 were 174 pmol/L and 46.4 pmol/L at baseline, respectively. Treatment with letrozole suppressed serum E1 and E2 to a mean value of 0.2 pmol/L and 0.4 pmol/L (P < 0.001). After the cross-over to exemestane, mean serum levels of E1 and E2 increased to 1.4 pmol/L and 0.7 pmol/L, respectively. In cohort 2, baseline mean serum levels of E1 and E2 were 159 and 32.5 pmol/L, respectively. Treatment with exemestane decreased these values to 1.8 pmol/L for E1 and 0.6 pmol/L for E2 (P < 0.001). Following cross-over to letrozole, mean serum levels of E1 and E2 were significantly further reduced to 0.1 pmol/L and 0.4 pmol/L, respectively. Serum drug levels were monitored in all patients throughout the entire treatment and confirmed adherence to the protocol and drug concentrations within the therapeutic range for all patients. Additionally, Ki-67 values decreased significantly during treatment with both aromatase inhibitors, showing a trend toward a stronger suppression in obese women.
    CONCLUSIONS: To the best of our knowledge, we present here for the first time a comprehensive and direct head-to-head, intra-patient-cross-over comparison of the aromatase inhibitor letrozole and the aromatase inactivator exemestane concerning their ability to suppress serum estrogen levels in vivo. All in all, our results clearly demonstrate that letrozole therapy results in a more profound suppression of serum E1 and E2 levels compared to exemestane.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号