Lenalidomide: a review of its use in the treatment of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma

In several countries, including the US and in Europe, oral lenalidomide in combination with oral dexamethasone is approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma patients (aged ≥ 18 years) who have received at least one prior antimyeloma therapy. The key therapeutic mechanisms of action of lenalidomide (a thalidomide analogue) reside in its immunomodulatory, antiproliferative and anti-angiogenic properties. In patients with multiple myeloma, lenalidomide has dual effects, exerting a direct antitumour response by inhibiting proliferation and by inducing apoptosis of tumour cells. Lenalidomide also acts to enhance the immune system by inducing the activation of immune effector cells, such as T cells and natural killer cells, and inducing cytokine production. In the pivotal MM-009 and MM-010 phase III registration trials, treatment with lenalidomide plus dexamethasone was effective and had a manageable safety and tolerability profile in relapsed or refractory patients with multiple myeloma. In robust pharmacoeconomic analyses based on these trials, relative to dexamethasone, lenalidomide plus dexamethasone treatment met the assumed willingness-to-pay threshold for cost effectiveness from the UK and Scottish healthcare payer perspective in this patient population. The UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence and the Scottish Medicines Consortium considered that the health economic case for lenalidomide plus dexamethasone treatment was demonstrated for patients who had received at least two prior antimyeloma therapies. In addition, in pharmacoeconomic analyses based on indirect comparisons of clinical efficacy, regulatory agencies in Norway and Sweden considered that lenalidomide plus dexamethasone treatment was cost effective relative to bortezomib in patients who have received at least one prior antimyeloma therapy. Furthermore, compared with placebo plus dexamethasone, treatment with lenalidomide plus dexamethasone significantly prolonged the median time to progression, increased overall response rates and prolonged overall survival, with significantly longer median time to progression and overall response rates observed for all subgroups of patients. Thus, combination therapy with lenalidomide plus dexamethasone provides a valuable option for the treatment of relapsed or refractory adult patients with multiple myeloma.     

Fludarabine: a review of its use in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma

Fludarabine (Fludara), a purine nucleoside analogue, has been extensively evaluated in the treatment of a number of lymphoproliferative malignancies, including various types of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Clinical studies have shown that fludarabine (alone, and particularly as a component of combination therapy) can result in high overall and complete response in adults with various types of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, including follicular lymphoma. As mono- or combination therapy, intravenous fludarabine is as effective as several other standard treatment regimens in treatment-naive patients and is also effective in patients with recurrent or refractory disease. The efficacy of fludarabine therapy is improved with the use of rituximab, as part of the initial therapeutic regimen or as maintenance therapy, and deserves consideration. The once-daily oral formulation was effective in the treatment of patients with relapsed indolent B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma; however, further studies are required to confirm its role and establish its efficacy relative to that of standard treatment in this patient population. Fludarabine has generally acceptable tolerability; however, it is associated with haematological adverse events, including myelosuppression. Fludarabine, therefore, provides a highly effective first- or second-line option in the treatment of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.     

Mitoxantrone: a review of its use in multiple sclerosis

Mitoxantrone (Novantrone), a synthetic anthracenedione derivative, is an antineoplastic, immunomodulatory agent. Its presumed mechanism of action in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) is via immunomodulatory mechanisms, although these remain to be fully elucidated. Intravenous mitoxantrone treatment improved neurological disability and delayed progression of MS in patients with worsening relapsing-remitting (RR) [also termed progressive-relapsing (PR) MS] or secondary-progressive (SP) disease. In a pivotal randomised, double-blind, multicentre trial, mitoxantrone 12 mg/m(2) administered once every 3 months for 2 years provided significant improvements in neurological disability ratings, including Kurtzke Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS), Ambulatory Index (AI) and Standardised Neurological Status (SNS) scores, compared with placebo. The drug also significantly reduced the mean number of corticosteroid-treated relapses and prolonged the time to the first treated relapse, with the beneficial effects on disease progression supported by magnetic resonance imaging. Post hoc analyses suggest that the benefits associated with mitoxantrone treatment may be sustained for at least 12 months after cessation of treatment, mean changes from baseline at 36 months in EDSS, AI and SNS scores of 0.10, 0.61 and 0.19, respectively, in the mitoxantrone group versus 0.46, 1.13 and 3.38 with placebo. Concomitant intravenous mitoxantrone 20mg plus intravenous methylprednisolone 1g once every month for 6 months was more effective than intravenous methylprednisolone monotherapy in preventing the development of new gadolinium-enhanced lesions in patients with very active RRMS or SPMS. The drug was generally well tolerated in patients with MS. Adverse events were generally mild to moderate in severity and usually resolved upon discontinuation of treatment or with appropriate pharmacotherapy. At the recommended dosage, mitoxantrone appears to have a low potential to cause cardiotoxicity. In conclusion, intravenous mitoxantrone reduces the relapse rate and slows progression of the disease in patients with worsening RRMS, PRMS or SPMS; thus providing a new option for the management of these patients. The drug was generally well tolerated at the recommended dosage, although potential cardiotoxicity limits the total cumulative dose to 140 mg/m(2). Further studies are warranted to determine which patients with worsening RRMS, PRMS or SPMS are most likely to benefit from mitoxantrone treatment and to more fully define the long-term safety and tolerability of mitoxantrone, including the use of concomitant cardioprotectants to extend the therapeutic lifespan of the drug. Pharmacodynamic Profile. Mitoxantrone, a synthetic anthracenedione derivative, is an established cytotoxic, antineoplastic agent. Its presumed mechanism of action in multiple sclerosis (MS) is immunosuppression. In antineoplastic studies, the drug showed several immunomodulatory effects, inducing macrophage-mediated suppression of B-cell, T-helper and T-cytotoxic lymphocyte function. Currently, the pharmacodynamic properties of mitoxantrone have not been investigated to any extent in patients with MS. In one study, 6 months' treatment with intravenous mitoxantrone generally had no effect on the distribution of cytokine-positive peripheral blood monocyte cells in patients with MS. In an animal model of the disease, mitoxantrone suppressed the development and progression of both actively and passively induced acute experimental allergic encephalomyelitis (EAE). It appeared to be 10-20 times more effective than cyclophosphamide in the suppression of EAE. Moreover, mitoxantrone approximately doubled the mean time to onset of EAE versus control animals (279 vs 148 days after immunisation; p < 0.00005). In vitro, mitoxantrone 10 and 100 micro g/L inhibited myelin degradation by leucocytes and peritoneal macrophages derived from mice with acute EAE by approximately 60% and 100%. Pharmacokinetic Profile. Currently, there are no published pharmacokinetic data for intravenous mitoxantrone in pitoxantrone in patients with MS, paediatric patients or in those with renal impairment. All studies, to date, have been in patients with cancer receiving a single, approximately 30-minute intravenous infusion of mitoxantrone 5-14 mg/m(2). The drug exhibits triexponential pharmacokinetics, with a rapid initial distribution (alpha) phase, an intermediate distribution (beta) phase and a much slower elimination (gamma) phase. The mean half-life of the alpha phase appears to be 6-12 minutes and that of the beta phase 1.1-3.1 hours. Mitoxantrone has a high affinity for tissue, with a volume of distribution of up to 2248 L/m(2). Mitoxantrone persists for prolonged periods in tissues and was detectable in autopsy tissue from patients who last received the drug up to 272 days before death. At concentrations of 10-10000 ng/mL, the drug was 70-80 % bound to plasma proteins in dogs. Elimination of mitoxantrone occurs predominantly through biliary excretion and may be impaired in patients with hepatic dysfunction or third space abnormalities (e.g. ascites). The mean terminal elimination half-life of mitoxantrone ranged from 23 hours to 215 hours. Renal clearance accounts for 10 % of the total clearance of the drug. Total clearance of mitoxantrone ranged from 13 to 34.2 L/h/m(2) and renal clearance from 0.9 to 2.7 L/h/m(2). The drug appears to have a low potential for interaction with other concomitantly administered agents. Therapeutic Efficacy. Intravenous mitoxantrone (infusion of > or = 5 minutes), either as monotherapy or in combination with intravenous methylprednisolone, delayed the progression of the disease in patients with secondary-progressive (SP) or worsening relapsing-remitting (RR) MS (the latter is also termed progressive-relapsing MS) in comparative, randomised, multicentre trials. In a double-blind, monotherapy trial (Mitoxantrone In Multiple Sclerosis [MIMS] trial), mitoxantrone 12 mg/m(2) (n = 60) once every 3 months for 2 years significantly improved neurological disability relative to placebo (n = 64), as assessed by changes in mean Kurtzke Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score, mean Ambulatory Index (AI) score and mean Standardised Neurological Status (SNS) score. The drug also significantly reduced the mean number of corticosteroid-treated relapses per patient and prolonged the time to the first treated relapse. A Wei-Lachin multivariate analysis of these five efficacy variables indicated that the global difference between the two treatment groups was 0.30 (p < 0.0001). Mitroxantrone was also more effective than placebo according to secondary endpoints in this study, with fewer mitoxantrone recipients experiencing a relapse, a deterioration of > or =1 EDSS point or a confirmed deterioration in EDSS score over a 3-month period. Mitoxantrone recipients also showed less deterioration in quality-of-life ratings and had fewer hospital admissions, whereas more placebo recipients had new gadolinium-enhanced lesions at study end (the latter parameter was assessed using magnetic resonance imaging [MRI] in a subgroup of 110 patients, including 40 patients who received an exploratory 5 mg/m(2) dose). Furthermore, post hoc analyses indicated that the beneficial effects of mitoxantrone treatment on EDSS, SNS and AI scores were sustained for at least 12 months after cessation of treatment, with mean changes from baseline at 36 months in EDSS, AI and SNS scores of 0.10, 0.61 and 0.19, respectively, in the mitoxantrone group versus 0.46, 1.13 and 3.38 with placebo. Preliminary data from a cost-minimisation analysis based on results from the MIMS trial indicated that approximately half of the cost of mitoxantrone was offset by cost savings in other areas associated with the treatment of MS (direct and indirect major costs), with a total annual incremental cost for mitoxantrone of dollar 1661 per patient. Combination therapy once-monthly with intravenous mitoxantrone 20mg plus intravenous methylprednisolone 1g was more effective than intravenous methylprednisolone 1g once every month in preventing the development of gadolinium-enhanced lesions in patients with very active RRMS or SPMS (double-blind assessment using MRI scans). After 6 months, significantly more combination therapy recipients had no new gadolinium-enhanced lesions (90.5% vs 31.3% with monotherapy; p < 0.001) [primary endpoint]. There were also significant reductions in both the mean number of new enhancing lesions and the total number of gadolinium-enhanced lesions in patients receiving combination therapy versus methylprednisolone monotherapy.Tolerability. Mitoxantrone was generally well tolerated in patients with MS. Treatment-emergent adverse events occurring significantly more frequently with mitoxantrone (12 mg/m(2) once every 3 months for 2 years) than placebo were nausea, alopecia, menstrual disorders, urinary tract infection, amenorrhoea, leucopenia and elevated gamma-glutamyltranspeptidase levels. Adverse events were usually mild to moderate in severity and generally resolved with discontinuation of treatment or when treated with appropriate pharmacotherapy. Eight percent of patients discontinued treatment in the mitoxantrone 12 mg/m(2) group due to an adverse event versus 3% of placebo recipients. The incidence of drug-related acute myelogenous leukaemia was very low (0.12%) in a cohort of 802 patients with MS receiving mitoxantrone. Evidence suggests that the risk of cardiotoxicity is low in patients with MS. After 1 year of monotherapy, 3.4% of mitoxantrone recipients had a reduction in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) to < or =50% compared with 0% of placebo recipients; at the end of the second year, respective incidences were 1.9% and 2.9% (total cumulative dose of mitoxantrone per patient was 96 mg/m(2) after 2 years' treatment). (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)     

多发性骨髓瘤患者外周血造血干细胞动员的临床分析

目的:探讨多发性骨髓瘤(MM)患者使用化疗联合粒细胞集落刺激因子(G-CSF)进行外周血造血干细胞动员的效果及影响因素.方法:将20例MM患者检测采集物中有核细胞数及CD34+细胞数量进行回顾性分析.结果:20例患者共经过44例次单采,自化疗结束至采集日平均时间为10.55(8～14)天.获得有核细胞均数为6.01×108/kg(1.67～14.7×108/kg),CD34+细胞12.49×106/kg(1.9～38×106/kg).仅有2例患者采集物CD34+细胞＜2.5×106/kg.对比两组的临床特征,发现CD34+细胞产率与病程,动员前化疗次数,外周血白细胞恢复时间相关,而与年龄、性别、疾病状态等因素无明显相关性.结论:化疗联合G-CSF方案应用于MM患者中,绝大多数能获得足够的干细胞,对于病程长,化疗次数多动员后血象恢复时间长的患者效果不佳.     

Perindopril: a review of its use in patients with or at risk of developing coronary artery disease

Perindopril (Coversyl) is a prodrug ester of perindoprilat, an ACE inhibitor. This agent has shown pharmacodynamic effects beyond those responsible for lowering blood pressure (BP), including the improvement of endothelial function and the normalisation of vascular and cardiac structure and function. Perindopril has a well established role in the treatment of patients with hypertension or heart failure. In the EUROPA trial, once-daily perindopril 8 mg prevented cardiovascular events in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) without any apparent heart failure receiving standard recommended therapy. In the ASCOT-BPLA trial, a calcium channel antagonist +/- perindopril regimen demonstrated significant cardiovascular benefits compared with a conventional beta-blocker +/- diuretic regimen in patients with hypertension who were at risk of developing cardiovascular events. These trials demonstrate that while perindopril, in addition to standard recommended therapy, has a potential role in preventing cardiovascular events in hypertensive patients, its role in the management of patients with stable CAD is clearly established.     

Glatiramer acetate: a review of its use in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

Glatiramer acetate is a synthetic copolymer composed of a random mixture of four amino acids that modifies the immune response that results in the CNS inflammation, demyelination and axonal loss characteristic of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). In three randomised, double-blind trials in patients with RRMS, subcutaneous glatiramer acetate 20 mg/day was significantly more effective than placebo for the primary outcome measure of each trial (mean relapse rate, proportion of relapse-free patients and number of gadolinium-enhancing lesions on magnetic resonance imaging [MRI] scans). The mean relapse rate was significantly reduced at endpoint (approximately one-third less) in the two larger trials (the US pivotal trial [primary endpoint] and the European/Canadian study [tertiary endpoint]) in patients receiving glatiramer acetate compared with those receiving placebo. The rate was 78% less for glatiramer acetate than placebo patients in the pilot trial that investigated a slightly different patient population. Glatiramer acetate significantly decreased disease activity and burden of disease, as assessed in the European/Canadian study using a range of MRI measures. Patients with RRMS treated with glatiramer acetate in the US trial were significantly more likely to experience improved disability (whereas placebo recipients were more likely to experience worsening disability) and their overall disability status was significantly improved compared with placebo recipients. Data from the active-treatment extension of the US trial suggest that glatiramer acetate has sustained clinical benefits up to 8 years. Glatiramer acetate was generally well tolerated; the most commonly reported treatment-related adverse events were localised injection-site reactions and transient post-injection systemic reactions. Both reactions were generally mild and self limiting but were responsible for the majority of withdrawals from treatment (up to 6.5 and 3.5%, respectively). Glatiramer acetate is not associated with the influenza-like syndrome or neutralising antibodies that are reported in patients treated with interferon-beta for RRMS. The cost effectiveness of glatiramer acetate has yet to be definitively determined as assessment of available data is confounded by very different models, data sources and assumptions. CONCLUSION: Glatiramer acetate has shown efficacy in well controlled clinical trials in patients with RRMS; it reduces relapse rate and decreases MRI-assessed disease activity and burden. It is generally well tolerated and is not associated with the influenza-like symptoms and formation of neutralising antibodies seen with the interferons-beta. Based on available data and current management guidelines, glatiramer acetate is a valuable first-line treatment option for patients with RRMS.     

Pravastatin: a review of its use in elderly patients

Pravastatin (Pravachol) is a competitive, reversible HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor that lowers serum cholesterol levels by inhibiting de novo cholesterol synthesis and has antiatherogenic effects that appear to be partially independent of its lipid-lowering effects.Pravastatin 10-40 mg/day produced significant reductions (vs baseline or placebo) in serum total cholesterol (TC) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels in elderly patients (aged >or=60 or >or= 65 years) with hypercholesterolaemia or normal cholesterol levels. Serum triglyceride and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels also improved in some studies, but not in others. Coadministration of cholestyramine, another lipid-lowering agent, further enhanced the lipid-lowering effects of pravastatin in elderly patients. Data from the large, long-term (3-6 years) PROspective Study Of Pravastatin in the Elderly at Risk (PROSPER), Cholesterol And Recurrent Events trial (CARE) and Long term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischaemic Disease (LIPID) trials demonstrated that pravastatin 40 mg/day reduces coronary events in elderly patients with hypercholesterolaemia or normal cholesterol levels, with or at high risk of developing coronary heart disease (CHD). In these trials, the incidence of death from CHD or the combined endpoint of death from CHD or nonfatal myocardial infarction was significantly lower in pravastatin than in placebo recipients.Pravastatin is well tolerated in the elderly, and adverse effects considered related to therapy are minimal. The most commonly occurring adverse events included gastrointestinal events, renal or genital system events, respiratory disorders, headaches and musculoskeletal pain. CONCLUSION: Pravastatin effectively lowers serum TC and LDL-C levels and, as demonstrated in major clinical outcome trials, reduces coronary events in elderly patients with hypercholesterolaemia or normal cholesterol levels. Pravastatin is well tolerated and as such should be considered a first-line agents for primary or secondary prevention in older individuals with evident CHD or multiple risk factors for CHD.     

Zoledronic acid: a review of its use in patients with advanced cancer

Zoledronic acid (Zometa), a parenteral bisphosphonate, is an inhibitor of osteoclast-mediated bone resorption and is used in the management of patients with cancer. Zoledronic acid 4 mg is administered as an intravenous infusion over 15 minutes. In the treatment of bone metastases, zoledronic acid is the first and only bisphosphonate to demonstrate efficacy in patients with a broad range of tumour types and in multiple myeloma. In well-designed trials, a single 4 mg dose of zoledronic acid showed good efficacy in the treatment of patients with hypercalcaemia of malignancy. Zoledronic acid 4 mg was superior to pamidronic acid 90 mg, administered as a 2-hour infusion, as assessed by normalised serum calcium concentrations 10 days after administration. In conjunction with antineoplastic therapy, zoledronic acid was an effective long-term (up to 25 months) treatment for skeletal-related events in patients with bone metastases associated with multiple myeloma or solid tumours. In patients with bone metastases secondary to breast cancer or bone lesions from myeloma, zoledronic acid was at least as effective as pamidronic acid, based on assessments of skeletal-related events 25 months after the start of treatment. In addition, compared with pamidronic acid, the overall risk of developing skeletal complications, including hypercalcaemia of malignancy, was significantly reduced in recipients of zoledronic acid. Compared with pamidronic acid, zoledronic acid reduced the risk of patients with breast cancer developing a skeletal-related event by an additional 20%. Zoledronic acid was significantly more effective than placebo on most efficacy measures in patients with bone metastases secondary to other solid tumours (e.g. lung, prostate) and showed sustained efficacy for up to 15 months. Preliminary data indicate that its efficacy in these patients is sustained for up to 24 months. Estimates of the cost effectiveness of zoledronic acid in the treatment of prostate cancer were consistent with those of other bisphosphonates, and cost-effectiveness ratios were within limits considered acceptable economic value. Zoledronic acid was generally well tolerated, with a tolerability profile similar to that of pamidronic acid and placebo. As with other bisphosphonates, deterioration of renal function has occasionally been reported in patients receiving zoledronic acid and monitoring of serum creatinine is recommended during treatment. The efficacy of zoledronic acid is therefore well established in patients with hypercalcaemia of malignancy and, for up to 25 months, in the treatment of complications arising from metastatic bone disease in patients with multiple myeloma or solid tumours. The clinical profile of zoledronic acid compares favourably with that of pamidronic acid in patients with cancer and zoledronic acid has a more convenient administration schedule with the potential for better compliance. Thus, zoledronic acid is an effective bisphosphonate and is positioned to play an important role in the management of advanced cancer patients with bone metastases.     

Rituximab: a review of its use in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and chronic lymphocytic leukaemia

Rituximab (MabThera, Rituxan) is an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody that induces lysis and apoptosis of normal and malignant human B cells, and sensitises malignant B cells to the cytotoxic effect of chemotherapy. In phase III trials in patients with indolent or aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), intravenous rituximab in combination with chemotherapy was more effective as first- or second-line therapy than chemotherapy alone in providing tumour remission and patient survival. Likewise, in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL), rituximab in combination with chemotherapy appeared more effective than chemotherapy alone as either first- or second-line treatment. In addition, rituximab maintenance therapy was shown to significantly prolong tumour remission and patient survival in patients with indolent B-cell NHL or CLL. The combination of rituximab with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (CHOP) was cost effective as first-line therapy for advanced-stage diffuse large B-cell NHL compared with CHOP alone. Rituximab, either alone or in combination with chemotherapy, was generally well tolerated in patients with NHL or CLL. Overall, rituximab in combination with chemotherapy, is a valuable option for first- and second-line therapy in patients with advanced-stage indolent or aggressive B-cell NHL, and possibly those with B-cell CLL, and is included in current treatment guidelines for these indications. The drug is also potentially useful as maintenance therapy in patients with indolent B-cell NHL or CLL.     

Rituximab: a review of its use in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and chronic lymphocytic leukaemia

Rituximab is an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody that has demonstrated efficacy in patients with various lymphoid malignancies, including indolent and aggressive forms of B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) and B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL). While the optimal use of the drug in many clinical settings has yet to be clarified, two pivotal trials have established rituximab as a viable treatment option in patients with relapsed or refractory indolent NHL, and as a standard first-line treatment option when combined with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (CHOP) chemotherapy in elderly patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (the most common type of aggressive NHL). The former was a noncomparative trial in relapsed indolent NHL (follicular and small lymphocytic subtypes) with clinical responses achieved in about half of patients treated with rituximab 375 mg/m(2) intravenously once weekly for 4 weeks, which was similar to some of the most encouraging results reported with traditional chemotherapeutic agents. The latter was a randomised comparison of eight cycles of CHOP plus rituximab 375 mg/m(2) intravenously (one dose per cycle) versus CHOP alone in previously untreated elderly patients (60 to 80 years of age) with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. In this pivotal trial, 2-year event-free and overall survival were significantly higher with rituximab plus CHOP, and there was no increase in clinically significant adverse effects compared with CHOP alone. Treatment with rituximab is generally well tolerated, particularly in terms of adverse haematological effects and serious or opportunistic infections relative to standard chemotherapy. Infusion-related reactions occur in the majority of patients treated with rituximab; these are usually mild to moderate flu-like symptoms that decrease in frequency with subsequent infusions. In approximately 10% of patients, however, severe infusion-related reactions develop (e.g. bronchospasm, hypotension). These reactions are usually reversible with appropriate interventions and supportive care but there have been rare reports of fatalities. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical trials with rituximab indicate that the drug has broad application to B-cell malignancies, although further clarification is needed to determine its optimal use in many of these clinical settings. Importantly, rituximab in combination with CHOP chemotherapy has emerged as a new treatment standard for previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, at least in elderly patients. Compared with conventional chemotherapy, rituximab is associated with markedly reduced haematological events such as severe neutropenia, as well as associated infections. Rituximab may be particularly suitable for elderly patients or those with poor performance status, and its tolerability profile facilitates its use in combination with cytotoxic drugs. PHARMACODYNAMIC PROPERTIES: Rituximab is a mouse/human chimaeric IgG(1)-kappa monoclonal antibody that targets the CD20 antigen found on the surface of malignant and normal B lymphocytes. Although treatment with rituximab induces lymphopenia in most patients, typically lasting about 6 months, a full recovery of B lymphocytes in the peripheral blood is usually seen 9-12 months after therapy, as CD20 is not expressed on haematopoietic stem cells. CD20 is, however, expressed on >90% of B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphomas (NHL) and to a lesser degree on B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) cells.Although not fully elucidated, the cytotoxic effects of rituximab on CD20-positive malignant B cells appears to involve complement-dependent cytotoxicity, complement-dependent cellular cytotoxicity, antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity and induction of apoptosis. In addition, in vitro data indicate that rituximab sensitises tumour cells to the effects of conventional chemotherapeutic drugs. PHARMACOKINETIC PROPERTIES: Serum rituximab concentrations increased in proportion to dose across a wide range of single- and multiple-dose intravenous regimens in patients with B-cell NHL. When administll NHL. When administered at a dose of 375 mg/m(2) once weekly for 4 weeks in a pivotal trial in patients with relapsed or refractory indolent B-cell NHL (follicular or small lymphocytic subtypes), peak serum concentrations essentially doubled from the first (239.1 mg/L) to the fourth (460.7 mg/L) infusion, while elimination half-life (t(1/2)) increased from 76.3 to 205.8 hours (3.2 to 8.6 days). The concomitant increase in serum rituximab concentrations and t(1/2) with each successive infusion may be due, at least in part, to the elimination of circulating CD20-positive B cells and reduction or saturation of CD20-binding sites after the initial infusions of rituximab. The pharmacokinetic properties of rituximab are also characterised by wide inter-individual variability, and serum drug concentrations that are correlated with clinical response. Although pharmacokinetic data are limited in patients with aggressive forms of NHL, such as diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, rituximab appears to have a similar pharmacokinetic profile in these patients to that in patients with indolent B-cell NHL. The pharmacokinetics of rituximab are also reported to be similar whether the drug is administered with or without cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (CHOP) chemotherapy. THERAPEUTIC USE: A number of studies have demonstrated efficacy of intravenous rituximab in patients with various lymphoid malignancies of B-cell origin, including indolent (e.g. follicular lymphoma) and aggressive (e.g. diffuse large B-cell lymphoma) forms of NHL, and CLL, but the drug has not yet been approved for use in CLL, and approved indications in NHL vary between countries. In the US, for example, rituximab is available for the treatment of patients with low-grade or follicular, relapsed or refractory, CD20-positive B-cell NHL. In Europe, the drug has similar approval for relapsed or refractory follicular NHL as in the US, but has also been approved for use in combination with CHOP chemotherapy for the most common aggressive form of NHL (CD20-positive, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma). Rituximab was approved for these indications primarily on the basis of results from two pivotal trials. In Japan, rituximab has been approved for indolent B-cell NHL and mantle cell lymphoma (an aggressive form of B-cell NHL), primarily on the basis of results of a Japanese phase II trial. Indolent NHL: Results of several studies evaluating rituximab 375 mg/m(2) once weekly for 4 weeks in patients with indolent forms of B-cell NHL (primarily follicular and small lymphocytic lymphomas) showed objective response (OR) rates ranging from approximately 40-60% in those receiving the drug for relapsed or refractory indolent B-cell NHL, and slightly higher (50-70%) for those receiving rituximab as first-line therapy. In a pivotal trial in 166 patients with relapsed or refractory low-grade or follicular B-cell NHL, intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis showed an OR rate of 48%, and a projected median time to progression of 13 months.Encouraging data are also emerging on the use of rituximab in combination with chemotherapeutic agents (e.g. CHOP, fludarabine-containing regimens) or other drugs (e.g. interferon-alpha2a) in previously untreated patients with indolent forms of B-cell NHL (primarily follicular and small lymphocytic subtypes). Rates for OR were consistently around 95%, with the majority being complete responses (CRs). Follow-up data from a study in 40 patients with low-grade or follicular B-cell NHL treated with rituximab plus CHOP as first-line therapy showed that responses were durable with a progression-free survival and median duration of response >5 years.Bcl-2 gene rearrangement (t14;18) occurs in malignant cells in up to 85% of patients with follicular lymphoma, and minimal residual disease in peripheral blood and bone marrow can be monitored using polymerase chain reaction (PCR). In several studies assessing blood and/or bone marrow, rituximab has achieved molecular response (conversion from PCR-positive to PCR-negative bcl-2 status) in at least half of the patients. Aggressive NHL: Studies with rituximab as monotherapy in aggressive B-cell NHL, a potentially curable disorder, have generally been restricted to patients with relapsed or recurrent disease, since CHOP has traditionally been the standard first-line treatment regimen. However, promising results from phase II monotherapy studies prompted further clinical investigation of rituximab in conjunction with chemotherapy. Thus, most studies with rituximab in patients with aggressive forms of B-cell NHL have involved combination therapy, including a pivotal randomised trial comparing eight cycles of standard CHOP therapy plus rituximab 375 mg/m(2) (one dose per cycle) versus CHOP alone in 399 previously untreated elderly patients (60-80 years of age) with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Results of the pivotal trial showed a clear advantage for rituximab plus CHOP versus CHOP in terms of event-free survival (primary endpoint) at 2 years (57% vs 38%, p < 0.001). Overall survival at 2 years (70% vs 57%, p < 0.01) and CR rate (76% vs 63%, p < 0.01) were also higher with the rituximab-CHOP combination. Other, smaller trials with rituximab in combination with CHOP or other chemotherapeutic regimens, either as first-line therapy or for patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive B-cell NHL, have also shown promising results in terms of clinical response rates.CLL: In relatively small trials (n < 40) conducted primarily in patients with relapsed or refractory B-cell CLL, rituximab monotherapy (various regimens) achieved OR rates of 23-45%, with median duration of response ranging from approximately 3-10 months. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)     

Orlistat: a review of its use in the management of patients with obesity

Orlistat is an inhibitor of gastrointestinal lipases and, therefore, prevents the absorption of dietary fat. This agent reduces weight in obese adults and adolescents with or without comorbidities (including type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypercholesterolaemia, hypertension, metabolic syndrome) who received up to 4 years of therapy in conjunction with a hypocaloric diet. In obese patients, orlistat in combination with a hypocaloric diet improved metabolic risk factors and reduced the risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Furthermore, this agent was cost effective in patients with obesity, particularly those with type 2 diabetes. Orlistat is generally well tolerated, with gastrointestinal adverse events being most commonly reported. Orlistat, in addition to lifestyle and dietary intervention, is thus an attractive option for the treatment of patients with obesity, especially those with associated comorbidities or at risk of developing type 2 diabetes.     

Sucrose-formulated octocog alfa: a review of its use in patients with haemophilia A

Sucrose-formulated octocog alfa (Kogenate Bayer, Kogenate FS, Helixate FS, Helixate nexgen) is a full-length recombinant human coagulation factor VIII (FVIII) product that is purified and formulated without the addition of human serum albumin and is stabilized with sucrose. The purification process of this formulation includes a solvent/detergent viral inactivation step. Sucrose-formulated octocog alfa is approved in the EU and US for the treatment of bleeding in patients with haemophilia A (congenital FVIII deficiency). Additionally, it is approved in the EU for the prophylaxis of bleeding in patients with haemophilia A and as a continuous infusion treatment in patients undergoing major surgery. Sucrose-formulated octocog alfa is effective and well tolerated as a FVIII replacement therapy in patients with haemophilia A, including those with severe disease undergoing major surgery. The therapeutic profile of this sucrose-formulated product cannot be compared with that of other octocog alfa or moroctocog alfa products because of a lack of head-to-head comparative studies. Pathogen transmission has not been reported with use of sucrose-formulated octocog alfa. Available data indicate that sucrose-formulated octocog alfa is an appropriate alternative to other recombinant FVIII products for the treatment and prophylaxis of bleeding episodes in adults and children with haemophilia A.     

Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin: a review of its use in metastatic breast cancer, ovarian cancer, multiple myeloma and AIDS-related Kaposi's sarcoma

Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (Caelyx?, Doxil?) represents an improved formulation of conventional doxorubicin, with reduced cardiotoxicity and an improved pharmacokinetic profile. This article reviews the efficacy and tolerability of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in metastatic breast cancer, progressive ovarian cancer, relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma and AIDS-related Kaposi's sarcoma, as well as summarizing its pharmacological properties. In three randomized, open-label, multicentre trials, monotherapy with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin was as effective as doxorubicin or capecitabine in the first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer, and as effective as vinorelbine or combination mitomycin plus vinblastine in taxane-refractory metastatic breast cancer. Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin alone was as effective as topotecan or gemcitabine alone in patients with progressive ovarian cancer resistant or refractory to platinum- or paclitaxel-based therapy, according to the results of three randomized multicentre trials. In addition, in patients with progressive ovarian cancer who had received prior platinum-based therapy, progression-free survival was significantly longer with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin plus carboplatin than with paclitaxel plus carboplatin, according to the results of a randomized, open-label multicentre trial. Combination therapy with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin plus bortezomib was more effective than bortezomib alone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, according to the results of a randomized, open-label, multinational trial. Randomized multinational trials also demonstrated the efficacy of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in patients with advanced AIDS-related Kaposi's sarcoma. Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin exhibited a relatively favourable safety profile compared with conventional doxorubicin and other available chemotherapy agents. The most common treatment-related adverse events included myelosuppression, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia and stomatitis, although these are manageable with appropriate supportive measures. To conclude, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin is a useful option in the treatment of various malignancies, including metastatic breast cancer, ovarian cancer, multiple myeloma and AIDS-related Kaposi's sarcoma.     

Eptifibatide: a review of its use in patients with acute coronary syndromes and/or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

Eptifibatide, a cyclic peptide, is a highly specific, intravenously administered glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist. By preventing fibrinogen binding to the GP IIb/IIIa receptor, eptifibatide inhibits platelet aggregation and prevents thrombus formation. Clinically, the drug is used as an adjunct to heparin and aspirin. The PURSUIT trial, conducted in >10,000 patients with unstable angina or non-Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI), showed that eptifibatide (180 microg/kg bolus then 2 microg/kg/min infusion for < or =72 hours) reduces the 30-day risk of death or nonfatal MI, with this benefit apparent at 96 hours. The absolute reduction in this end-point of 1.5% persisted at 6 months. The drug is effective in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and, as shown in the North American subgroup, in patients in whom medical management is appropriate. Eptifibatide is also beneficial in patients undergoing PCI, whether or not they have unstable angina or non-Q-wave MI. In a dosage of 135 microg/kg then 0.5 microg/kg/min for 24 hours, eptifibatide reduced the 30-day risk of a combined end-point (death, nonfatal MI and urgent or emergency coronary interventions) by 2.5% (absolute reduction) in patients undergoing PCI in the IMPACT-II trial, when measured by per-protocol (patients treated), but not intent-to-treat, analysis. The drug also decreased the incidence of abrupt vessel closure and ischaemic cardiovascular complications in the first 24 hours (the period of greatest risk). Bleeding episodes are the most common adverse event associated with eptifibatide therapy. Although the incidence of major bleeding is increased with eptifibatide, most bleeding episodes are minor and occur at the vascular access site. The drug is not associated with an excess of intracranial bleeds, stroke or thrombocytopenia, does not appear to increase bleeding risk in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), and does not cause antibody formation. Limited data suggest that eptifibatide may improve coronary flow when combined with alteplase in patients with acute Q-wave MI, but the possibility of increased bleeding with eptifibatide plus thrombolytics should be borne in mind. CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous eptifibatide, when combined with aspirin and heparin, reduces the 30-day risk of ischaemic events in patients with unstable angina and non-Q-wave MI and decreases ischaemic cardiovascular complications at the time of greatest risk in patients undergoing PCI. With its acceptable tolerability profile eptifibatide is a suitable option as a short term adjunct in these clinical settings. Whether eptifibatide in combination with fibrolysis may improve outcome in patients with acute Q-wave MI has yet to be determined.     

Lenalidomide in combination or alone as maintenance therapy following autologous stem cell transplant in patients with multiple myeloma: a review of options for and against

Introduction: Lenalidomide has multifaceted antimyeloma properties, including direct tumoricidal and immunomodulatory effects. Several randomized controlled trials have demonstrated improved patient outcomes with lenalidomide maintenance after autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). Currently, single-agent lenalidomide is the only approved post-ASCT maintenance therapy in the United States and European Union for patients with NDMM.

Areas covered: This review article summarizes the efficacy and safety data of lenalidomide maintenance, as monotherapy and in combination with other agents, following ASCT in patients with NDMM. In addition, emerging therapies with newer agents in this setting are discussed.

Expert opinion: Following ASCT, maintenance therapy with lenalidomide until progressive disease is an effective and well-tolerated regimen and represents the standard of care for patients with NDMM. Studies evaluating maintenance with lenalidomide in combination with next-generation proteasome inhibitors, monoclonal antibodies, and histone deacetylase inhibitors may further improve patient outcomes.     

Eptifibatide: a review of its use in patients with acute coronary syndromes and/or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

Eptifibatide (Integrilin) is a highly specific, reversible, intravenously administered glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist that acts at the final common step of the platelet aggregation pathway. Data from large clinical trials indicate that intravenous eptifibatide as adjunctive therapy to standard care is effective in patients with non-ST-segment elevation (NSTE) acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and/or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In the ESPRIT (Enhanced Suppression of the Platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Receptor with Integrilin Therapy) trial in patients undergoing PCI with stenting, eptifibatide, compared with placebo, achieved significant reductions in death and ischaemic complications and was better than a strategy of reserving treatment for the bailout situation. In the large PURSUIT (Platelet IIb/IIIa in Unstable angina: Receptor Suppression Using Integrilin Therapy) trial in patients with NSTE ACS, eptifibatide was associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of death or myocardial infarction (MI) compared with placebo. Eptifibatide is well tolerated in these trials. Ongoing trials are currently investigating the efficacy and tolerability of regimens that include this agent in other indications, including ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI).     

Fingolimod: a review of its use in the management of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

Oral fingolimod (Gilenya?), a sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P) receptor agonist, is the first oral agent and the first in a novel class of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) to be approved for use in the US for the treatment of relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (MS). In the EU, fingolimod is approved for use as a single-agent DMT in selected patients with highly-active, relapsing-remitting (RR) MS. This article reviews the pharmacological properties and clinical use of the drug in patients with RRMS. Fingolimod is rapidly converted in vivo to the active moiety S-fingolimod-phosphate, which binds with high affinity to S1P receptors, thereby sequestering lymphocytes in the lymph nodes and preventing their egress into the peripheral circulation. As a consequence, there is a reduction in the infiltration of autoaggressive lymphocytes into the CNS. Fingolimod-phosphate also acts as a functional antagonist, as its binding to S1P receptors results in their internalization and degradation, thereby downregulating S1P receptors on the lymphocyte cell surface. Since fingolimod crosses the blood?:?brain barrier, it also potentially acts at S1P receptors on neural cells in the CNS to mitigate neuropathological processes associated with MS. In large multinational trials in adult patients with RRMS, oral fingolimod 0.5?mg/day was more effective than oral placebo (FREEDOMS) and recommended dosages of intramuscular interferon-β (IFNβ)-1a (TRANSFORMS) in reducing the annualized relapse rate and was also generally more effective at slowing progression of neurological disability and at reducing the burden and activity of disease. Fingolimod was generally well tolerated in these trials of up to 2 years' duration, with most adverse events being manageable and of mild to moderate severity; there were two deaths from opportunistic infections, albeit these occurred with fingolimod 1.25?mg/day (higher than the recommended dosage). Limited long-term data indicated that no new safety concerns had arisen after 5 years of fingolimod treatment. However, further clinical experience is required to fully determine the long-term safety profile of fingolimod, particularly with regard to any potentially serious or life-threatening adverse events. In the absence of robust pharmacoeconomic studies and of head-to-head trials comparing fingolimod with other formulations of IFNβ and glatiramer acetate, the relative position of fingolimod with respect to other DMTs remains to be fully determined. In the meantime, given its convenient once-daily oral treatment regimen and better efficacy than intramuscular IFNβ-1a, fingolimod is a valuable emerging option for the treatment of adult patients with relapsing forms of MS.     

Meropenem: a review of its use in patients in intensive care

Meropenem is a carbapenem antibacterial agent that has antimicrobial activity against gram-negative, gram-positive and anaerobic micro-organisms. In vitro studies involving isolates from patients in intensive care units (ICUs) indicate that meropenem is more active against most gram-negative pathogens than other comparators (including imipenem), although, compared with imipenem, meropenem is less active against most gram-positive organisms. Resistance to meropenem is uncommon in most bacteria. Treatment with meropenem as initial empirical monotherapy was effective in a range of serious infections in adult and paediatric ICU patients. Meropenem monotherapy was as effective as imipenem/cilastatin in 4 comparative trials in terms of satisfactory clinical and bacteriological responses. Meropenem monotherapy was significantly more effective than ceftazidime-based combination treatments in 2 trials in patients with nosocomial lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) in terms of both clinical and bacteriological responses. Meropenem was also more active than ceftazidime-based treatments against both gram-positive and gram-negative organisms. However, 2 studies in patients with a range of serious infections found no significant differences between meropenem and cephalosporin-based treatments in terms of clinical or bacteriological response. Meropenem was also as effective as cephalosporin-based treatments in comparative trials in children with serious infections. Meropenem is well tolerated as either a bolus or an infusion, and clinical trials have shown similar incidences of adverse events to those observed with cephalosporin-based treatments. It is well tolerated by the CNS, with seizures reported infrequently, and can therefore be used at high doses and in patients with meningitis. The incidence of drug-related nausea and vomiting is low and, in contrast to imipenem/cilastatin, does not increase with dose or speed of administration. Conclusions: Meropenem is a well tolerated broad spectrum antibacterial agent that, when used as initial empirical monotherapy, is as effective as imipenem/cilastatin in the treatment of a range of serious infections (including nosocomial) in adults and children in ICUs. Compared with cephalosporin-based combination treatments, meropenem monotherapy may be more effective in the treatment of nosocomial LRTIs and can be used as monotherapy. Meropenem has an important role in the empirical treatment of serious infections in adults and children in ICUs.