Treatment of multiple adjacent RT 1 gingival recessions with the modified coronally advanced tunnel (MCAT) technique and a collagen matrix or palatal connective tissue graft: 9-year results of a split-mouth randomized clinical trial

Clinical Oral Investigations - To evaluate t he long-term outcomes following treatment of RT 1 multiple adjacent gingival recessions (MAGR) using the modified coronally advanced tunnel (MCAT) with...     

Update PONV – Was gibt es Neues bei der Prophylaxe und Therapie von postoperativer Übelkeit und postoperativem Erbrechen?

Die Anaesthesiologie - Auch wenn für Anästhesiologen über Jahrzehnte die Prophylaxe und Therapie postoperativer Schmerzen im Rahmen des postoperativen Patientenkomforts an vorderster...     

A systematic review of the methodological quality of economic evaluations in genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders

PurposeUnderstanding the value of genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders requires high-quality, methodologically robust economic evaluations. This systematic review sought to assess the methodological quality among such studies and examined opportunities for improvement.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science for economic evaluations of genetic screening/testing (2013-2019). Methodological rigor and adherence to best practices were systematically assessed using the British Medical Journal checklist.ResultsAcross the 47 identified studies, there were substantial variations in modeling approaches, reporting detail, and sophistication. Models ranged from simple decision trees to individual-level microsimulations that compared between 2 and >20 alternative interventions. Many studies failed to report sufficient detail to enable replication or did not justify modeling assumptions, especially for costing methods and utility values. Meta-analyses, systematic reviews, or calibration were rarely used to derive parameter estimates. Nearly all studies conducted some sensitivity analysis, and more sophisticated studies implemented probabilistic sensitivity/uncertainty analysis, threshold analysis, and value of information analysis.ConclusionWe describe a heterogeneous body of work and present recommendations and exemplar studies across the methodological domains of (1) perspective, scope, and parameter selection; (2) use of uncertainty/sensitivity analyses; and (3) reporting transparency for improvement in the economic evaluation of genetic screening/testing.     

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.