Sustainability and switching of biologics for psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis at Fukuoka University Psoriasis Registry

Biologics are efficacious for treating psoriasis vulgaris (PsV) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA), but sometimes must be terminated or changed for various reasons including ineffectiveness or adverse events. To find the optimal choice of biologics for treating psoriasis, we analyzed the real‐world data on drug survival and the reason for terminating or switching biologics. Medical records from patients with PsV or PsA, who visited the Department of Dermatology, Fukuoka University Hospital from 2010 to 2017, were analyzed. Two hundred and eleven patients received biologics, and 147 patients (69.7%) were treated with only one biologic, while 64 patients (30.3%) were switched to different products. Frequently used biologics in PsV were ustekinumab (UST), infliximab and adalimumab when calculated by patient‐year. Tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) use decreased while UST and interleukin (IL)‐17 inhibitors increased in newly introduced patients. UST showed the highest survival rate as a first‐line drug, but the advantage was lost in the second reagent's group. The major reasons for terminating/switching biologics were as follows: primary ineffectiveness (26.4%), secondary loss of efficacy (36.5%), patient's preference, including referral to nearby hospital, or stopped visiting (22.6%), side‐effects (7.7%), comorbidities (3.4%) and economic burden (2.4%). In PsA patients, TNFi are more frequently employed than in PsV patients, although switching to UST or IL‐17 inhibitors showed an increasing trend. Biologic reagents were changed mostly because of primary or secondary loss of efficacy, which affected drug survival. Further research is needed to find the optimal choice of biologics with larger samples at multiple facilities.     

A graph model of combination therapies

The simultaneous use of multiple medications causes drug–drug interactions (DDI) that impact therapeutic efficacy. Here, we argue that graph theory, in conjunction with game theory and ecosystem theory, can address this issue. We treat the coexistence of multiple drugs as a system in which DDI is modeled by game theory. We develop an ordinary differential equation model to characterize how the concentration of a drug changes as a result of its independent capacity and the dependent influence of other drugs through the metabolic response of the host. We coalesce all drugs into personalized and context-specific networks, which can reveal key DDI determinants of therapeutical efficacy. Our model can quantify drug synergy and antagonism and test the translational success of combination therapies to the clinic.     

Diabetes is associated with high risk of severe adverse events during chemotherapy for cancer patients: A single-center study

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a common comorbidity among cancer patients, but its impact on chemotherapy tolerance has not been widely studied. We aimed to compare the occurrence of severe grade 3/4 adverse events (G3/4 AEs) within 90 days of starting chemotherapy between patients with and without diabetes. We conducted a retrospective single-center study in Lille University Hospital Oncology Department, France. Patients who received the first cycle of chemotherapy for gastrointestinal, gynecological or cancer of unknown primary source between 1 May 2013 and 1 May 2016, were included. Overall, 609 patients were enrolled: 490 patients without diabetes (80.5%) and 119 patients with diabetes (19.5%). Within 90 days of starting chemotherapy, patients with diabetes had a significantly higher occurrence of AEs G3/4 compared to those with no diabetes (multivariate odds ratio [OR]: 1.57 [1.02-2.42], P = .04). More frequent G3/4 AEs in patients with diabetes were infection (26%), hematological disorders (13%), endocrine disorders (13%) and deterioration of the general condition (13%). In the year following the beginning of chemotherapy, patients with diabetes were twice as likely to be hospitalized as those without diabetes (univariate OR: 2.1 [1.40-3.15], P = .0003). After multivariate adjustment, diabetes was no longer significantly associated with the risk of hospitalization (P = .051). There were no differences between patients with and without diabetes regarding dose reduction and chemotherapy treatment delays (P = .61 and P = .30, respectively). Our study suggests the need for better consideration of DM in the personalized care plan to improve chemotherapy tolerance and quality of life of patients with DM.     

SHEL模式下基层医院护理人员高警示药品安全管理培训的效果

目的:探究SHEL模式下基层医院护理人员高警示药品安全管理培训的效果。方法:选取2020年7月—2021年6月在医院从事临床护理工作的80名护理人员,随机将其分为观察组与对照组各40人。对照组实施常规培训模式,观察组实施SHEL模式培训,比较两组护理人员高警示药品相关知识及技能掌握程度、意外事件发生率及核心能力。结果:培训后观察组护理人员理论及操作得分分别为(86.75±6.18)分及(93.19±4.28)分,核心能力得分为(228.98±8.37)分,均明显高于对照组(P<0.05),同时观察组护理人员在护理过程中出现给药前未双人核对、药品分类不清及交接记录不全的概率分别为0.95%、0.95%及1.90%,明显低于对照组(P<0.05),且未出现药物外渗及滴速有误等情况。结论:对基层医院护理人员实施SHEL模式下高警示药品安全管理培训,能够有效提高护理人员高警示药品理论、技能掌握程度及核心能力,同时有助于降低护理工作中意外事件的发生概率。