Higher Preimplantation Opioid Doses Associated With Long‐Term Spinal Cord Stimulation Failure in 211 Patients With Failed Back Surgery Syndrome

ObjectiveSpinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an effective treatment in failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). We studied the effect of preimplantation opioid use on SCS outcome and the effect of SCS on opioid use during a two-year follow-up period.Materials and methodsThe study cohort included 211 consecutive FBSS patients who underwent an SCS trial from January 1997 to March 2014. Participants were divided into groups, which were as follows: 1) SCS trial only (n = 47), 2) successful SCS (implanted and in use throughout the two-year follow-up period, n = 131), and 3) unsuccessful SCS (implanted but later explanted or revised due to inadequate pain relief, n = 29). Patients who underwent explantation for other reasons (n = 4) were excluded. Opioid purchase data from January 1995 to March 2016 were retrieved from national registries.ResultsHigher preimplantation opioid doses associated with unsuccessful SCS (ROC: AUC = 0.66, p = 0.009), with 35 morphine milligram equivalents (MME)/day as the optimal cutoff value. All opioids were discontinued in 23% of patients with successful SCS, but in none of the patients with unsuccessful SCS (p = 0.004). Strong opioids were discontinued in 39% of patients with successful SCS, but in none of the patients with unsuccessful SCS (p = 0.04). Mean opioid dose escalated from 18 ± 4 MME/day to 36 ± 6 MME/day with successful SCS and from 22 ± 8 MME/day to 82 ± 21 MME/day with unsuccessful SCS (p < 0.001).ConclusionsHigher preimplantation opioid doses were associated with SCS failure, suggesting the need for opioid tapering before implantation. With continuous SCS therapy and no explantation or revision due to inadequate pain relief, 39% of FBSS patients discontinued strong opioids, and 23% discontinued all opioids. This indicates that SCS should be considered before detrimental dose escalation.     

Phase I Dose-Escalation Study of SCB01A,a Microtubule Inhibitor with Vascular Disrupting Activity,in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors

Lessons Learned

• SCB01A is a novel microtubule inhibitor with vascular disrupting activity.
• This first‐in‐human study demonstrated SCB01A safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary antitumor activity.
• SCB01A is safe and well tolerated in patients with advanced solid malignancies with manageable neurotoxicity.

BackgroundSCB01A, a novel microtubule inhibitor, has vascular disrupting activity.MethodsIn this phase I dose‐escalation and extension study, patients with advanced solid tumors were administered intravenous SCB01A infusions for 3 hours once every 21 days. Rapid titration and a 3 + 3 design escalated the dose from 2 mg/m² to the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) based on dose‐limiting toxicity (DLT). SCB01A‐induced cellular neurotoxicity was evaluated in dorsal root ganglion cells. The primary endpoint was MTD. Safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and tumor response were secondary endpoints.ResultsTreatment‐related adverse events included anemia, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, fever, and peripheral sensorimotor neuropathy. DLTs included grade 4 elevated creatine phosphokinase (CPK) in the 4 mg/m² cohort; grade 3 gastric hemorrhage in the 6.5 mg/m² cohort; grade 2 thromboembolic event in the 24 mg/m² cohort; and grade 3 peripheral sensorimotor neuropathy, grade 3 elevated aspartate aminotransferase, and grade 3 hypertension in the 32 mg/m² cohort. The MTD was 24 mg/m², and average half‐life was ~2.5 hours. The area under the curve‐dose response relationship was linear. Nineteen subjects were stable after two cycles. The longest treatment lasted 24 cycles. SCB01A‐induced neurotoxicity was reversible in vitro.ConclusionThe MTD of SCB01A was 24 mg/m² every 21 days; it is safe and tolerable in patients with solid tumors.     

A Phase I Dose Escalation Study of the Safety,Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of Ipilimumab in Chinese Patients with Select Advanced Solid Tumors

Lessons Learned

• The overall safety profiles of ipilimumab 3 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg administered every 3 weeks, were consistent between Chinese patients with solid tumors in the current study and patients from previous U.S. ipilimumab monotherapy studies. No new safety signals were identified.
• The mean systemic exposures to ipilimumab (assessed by first dose area under the curve during the dosing interval and maximum serum concentration) were numerically lower in the Chinese patient population than in U.S. patients for both 3 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg doses; however, the range of serum concentrations in the Chinese and U.S. populations overlapped (3 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg), suggesting that ipilimumab pharmacokinetics was ethnically insensitive in this study.

BackgroundThis phase I, open‐label study assessed ipilimumab safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), immunogenicity, and antitumor activity in Chinese patients with unresectable, metastatic, recurrent malignant melanoma (MM) or nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC).MethodsOf 39 patients enrolled, 25 received ipilimumab (11 patients received 3 mg/kg, and 14 patients received 10 mg/kg). Reasons for not receiving treatment were withdrawal of consent (3 patients), no longer meeting the criteria (10 patients), and one recorded as “other.” During the induction phase, patients received ipilimumab (3 mg/kg, i.v.), on day 1 of a 3‐week cycle, to a maximum of four doses or progressive disease (PD). During the maintenance phase at week 24, patients received ipilimumab (3 mg/kg, i.v.) on day 1 of a 12‐week cycle, to a maximum of 3 years or PD. Considering the co‐primary safety and PK endpoints, the successive dosing required nine patients with two or fewer dose‐limiting toxicities during the 42‐day observation period to proceed with a new cohort of nine patients at 10 mg/kg.ResultsIpilimumab safety and PK profiles were similar in Chinese and predominantly White populations. Ipilimumab was well tolerated. Most adverse events (AEs) were grades 1–2 and experienced by 11 patients treated with 3 mg/kg and 14 patients treated with 10 mg/kg. There were no new safety concerns. Incidence of anti‐ipilimumab antibodies was low (1 of 10 in the 3 mg/kg patients and 2 of 13 in the 10 mg/kg patients) and without safety implications. In the 3 mg/kg group, 8 of 11 patients had PD. In the 10 mg/kg group (all NPC, 0 MM patients), 11 of 14 patients had PD. Three patients had stable disease (one at 3 mg/kg and two at 10 mg/kg).ConclusionIpilimumab was well tolerated in Chinese patients, showing similar safety and PK to previous studies in predominantly White populations.     

基于标准化患者法评价四川农村基层医生两种慢性病诊断准确性及其影响因素

目的 运用标准化患者法评估四川农村地区基层医生不稳定型心绞痛和2型糖尿病两种慢性病诊断准确性现状,探讨基层医生两种慢性病诊断准确性的主要影响因素,为提升基层医生两种慢性病诊断准确性提供科学依据。方法 采用多阶段随机整群抽样方法,抽取四川省自贡市5个区/县50个乡镇100个村为研究现场,以调查当日在岗的全科及内科医生作为研究对象。共进行两轮数据采集,第1轮采集样本乡镇卫生院和村卫生室医生的基本信息;第1轮调查完成1个月后,运用标准化患者法开展第2轮调查,收集农村基层医生对不稳定型心绞痛和2型糖尿病诊断结果信息。运用Logistic回归分析农村基层医生不稳定型心绞痛和2型糖尿病诊断准确性的影响因素。结果 共纳入172名农村基层医生,完成186次标准化患者访问,正确诊断率为48.39%。其中不稳定型心绞痛的正确诊断率为18.68%(17/91),2型糖尿病的正确诊断率为76.84%(73/95)。Logistic回归分析显示,具有执业医师资质的农村基层医生更有可能做出正确诊断(OR=4.857,95%CI=1.076~21.933,P=0.040)。农村基层医生在诊断过程中涉及的必要问诊和检查条目越多,做出正确诊断的概率越高(OR=1.627,95%CI=1.065~2.485,P=0.024)。与不稳定型心绞痛相比,农村基层医生对2型糖尿病做出正确诊断的可能性更高(OR=6.306,95%CI=3.611~11.013,P<0.001)。结论 四川农村基层医生不稳定型心绞痛和2型糖尿病诊断准确性整体较差,建议以基层医生慢性病诊断过程质量改善为突破口,提升基层医生执业水平,进而提高慢性病诊断准确性。     

Glucose starvation induces resistance to metformin through the elevation of mitochondrial multidrug resistance protein 1

Metformin, a drug for type 2 diabetes mellitus, has shown therapeutic effects for various cancers. However, it had no beneficial effects on the survival rate of human malignant mesothelioma (HMM) patients. The present study was performed to elucidate the underlying mechanism of metformin resistance in HMM cells. Glucose‐starved HMM cells had enhanced resistance to metformin, demonstrated by decreased apoptosis and autophagy and increased cell survival. These cells showed abnormalities in mitochondria, such as decreased ATP synthesis, morphological elongation, altered mitochondrial permeability transition pore and hyperpolarization of mitochondrial membrane potential (MMP). Intriguingly, Mdr1 was significantly upregulated in mitochondria but not in cell membrane. The upregulated mitochondrial Mdr1 was reversed by treatment with carbonyl cyanide m‐chlorophenyl hydrazone, an MMP depolarization inducer. Furthermore, apoptosis and autophagy were increased in multidrug resistance protein 1 knockout HMM cells cultured under glucose starvation with metformin treatment. The data suggest that mitochondrial Mdr1 plays a critical role in the chemoresistance to metformin in HMM cells, which could be a potential target for improving its therapeutic efficacy.     

Orientation and mobility outcome measures

Despite orientation and mobility (O&M) being a significant factor determining quality of life of people with low vision or blindness, there are no gold standard measures or agreement on how to measure O&M performance. In the first part of this systematic review, an inventory of O&M outcome measures used by recent studies to assess the performance of orientation and/or mobility of adults with vision impairment (low vision and blindness) is presented. A wide variety of O&M outcome measures have been implemented in different fields of study, such as epidemiologic research and interventional studies evaluating training, assistive technology, vision rehabilitation and vision restoration. The most frequent aspect of outcome measures is efficiency such as time, distance, speed and percentage of preferred walking speed, followed by obstacle contacts and avoidance, and dis/orientation and veering. Other less commonly used aspects are target identification, safety and social interaction and self-reported outcome measures. Some studies employ sophisticated equipment to capture and analyse O&M performance in a laboratory setting, while others carry out their assessment in real-world indoor or outdoor environments. In the second part of this review, the appropriateness of implementing the identified outcome measures to assess O&M performance in clinical and functional O&M practice is evaluated. Nearly a half of these outcome measures meet all four criteria of face validity (either clinical or functional), responsiveness, reliability and feasibility and have the potential to be implemented in clinical or functional O&M practice. The findings of this review confirm the complicated and dynamic nature of O&M. Multiple measures are required in any evaluation of O&M performance to facilitate holistic assessment of O&M abilities and limitations of each individual.