User login
Vaccination does not eliminate risk for meningococcal disease in eculizumab recipients
Patients taking eculizumab are at a significant risk for meningococcal disease even if they have received the quadrivalent meningococcal conjugate (MenACWY) and serogroup B (MenB) meningococcal vaccines, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, released July 7.
Between 2008 and 2016, 16 cases of meningococcal disease were reported in eculizumab users in 10 jurisdictions within the United States. Of those infected, 14 had received MenACWY and MenB vaccines as recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, according to the CDC report.
Required vaccination plus antimicrobial prophylaxis for the duration of eculizumab treatment might reduce the risk for meningococcal disease in these patients, but the addition of antibiotic prophylaxis is no guarantee that all cases of meningococcal disease would be prevented, wrote Lucy A. McNamara, PhD, of the division of bacterial diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, CDC, and her colleagues.
They advised physician and patient vigilance regarding meningococcal disease symptoms and urged that patients be advised to seek immediate care and be rapidly treated, regardless of meningococcal vaccination or antimicrobial prophylaxis status.
Health organizations in Europe, including France and the United Kingdom, are recommending eculizumab users receive penicillin during eculizumab treatment. A recent study of invasive meningococcal isolates in the United States found most were susceptible to penicillin, according to the report.
In the 16 U.S. cases reported, nongroupable Neisseria meningitidis caused meningococcal disease in 11 of the patients, serogroup Y was the cause in 4 patients, and the cause was not identified in 1 patient.
Ten patients had meningococcemia without meningitis, the researchers noted. “Initial symptoms of meningococcemia are often relatively mild and nonspecific and might include fever, chills, fatigue, vomiting, diarrhea, and aches or pains in the muscles, joints, chest, or abdomen; however, these symptoms can progress to severe illness and death within hours.”
Eculizumab (Soliris, Alexion Pharmaceuticals) is licensed in the United States for treatment of paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria and atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome, two diseases that are rare and can be fatal.
Eculizumab is associated with a 1,000-fold to 2,000-fold increased incidence of meningococcal disease among persons receiving the drug. The Food and Drug Administration–approved prescribing information includes a boxed warning regarding increased risk for meningococcal disease.
The CDC is collecting reports from state health departments for further analysis of the risk among eculizumab recipients.
The researchers reported having no conflicts of interest.
ezimmerman@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @eaztweets
Patients taking eculizumab are at a significant risk for meningococcal disease even if they have received the quadrivalent meningococcal conjugate (MenACWY) and serogroup B (MenB) meningococcal vaccines, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, released July 7.
Between 2008 and 2016, 16 cases of meningococcal disease were reported in eculizumab users in 10 jurisdictions within the United States. Of those infected, 14 had received MenACWY and MenB vaccines as recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, according to the CDC report.
Required vaccination plus antimicrobial prophylaxis for the duration of eculizumab treatment might reduce the risk for meningococcal disease in these patients, but the addition of antibiotic prophylaxis is no guarantee that all cases of meningococcal disease would be prevented, wrote Lucy A. McNamara, PhD, of the division of bacterial diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, CDC, and her colleagues.
They advised physician and patient vigilance regarding meningococcal disease symptoms and urged that patients be advised to seek immediate care and be rapidly treated, regardless of meningococcal vaccination or antimicrobial prophylaxis status.
Health organizations in Europe, including France and the United Kingdom, are recommending eculizumab users receive penicillin during eculizumab treatment. A recent study of invasive meningococcal isolates in the United States found most were susceptible to penicillin, according to the report.
In the 16 U.S. cases reported, nongroupable Neisseria meningitidis caused meningococcal disease in 11 of the patients, serogroup Y was the cause in 4 patients, and the cause was not identified in 1 patient.
Ten patients had meningococcemia without meningitis, the researchers noted. “Initial symptoms of meningococcemia are often relatively mild and nonspecific and might include fever, chills, fatigue, vomiting, diarrhea, and aches or pains in the muscles, joints, chest, or abdomen; however, these symptoms can progress to severe illness and death within hours.”
Eculizumab (Soliris, Alexion Pharmaceuticals) is licensed in the United States for treatment of paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria and atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome, two diseases that are rare and can be fatal.
Eculizumab is associated with a 1,000-fold to 2,000-fold increased incidence of meningococcal disease among persons receiving the drug. The Food and Drug Administration–approved prescribing information includes a boxed warning regarding increased risk for meningococcal disease.
The CDC is collecting reports from state health departments for further analysis of the risk among eculizumab recipients.
The researchers reported having no conflicts of interest.
ezimmerman@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @eaztweets
Patients taking eculizumab are at a significant risk for meningococcal disease even if they have received the quadrivalent meningococcal conjugate (MenACWY) and serogroup B (MenB) meningococcal vaccines, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, released July 7.
Between 2008 and 2016, 16 cases of meningococcal disease were reported in eculizumab users in 10 jurisdictions within the United States. Of those infected, 14 had received MenACWY and MenB vaccines as recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, according to the CDC report.
Required vaccination plus antimicrobial prophylaxis for the duration of eculizumab treatment might reduce the risk for meningococcal disease in these patients, but the addition of antibiotic prophylaxis is no guarantee that all cases of meningococcal disease would be prevented, wrote Lucy A. McNamara, PhD, of the division of bacterial diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, CDC, and her colleagues.
They advised physician and patient vigilance regarding meningococcal disease symptoms and urged that patients be advised to seek immediate care and be rapidly treated, regardless of meningococcal vaccination or antimicrobial prophylaxis status.
Health organizations in Europe, including France and the United Kingdom, are recommending eculizumab users receive penicillin during eculizumab treatment. A recent study of invasive meningococcal isolates in the United States found most were susceptible to penicillin, according to the report.
In the 16 U.S. cases reported, nongroupable Neisseria meningitidis caused meningococcal disease in 11 of the patients, serogroup Y was the cause in 4 patients, and the cause was not identified in 1 patient.
Ten patients had meningococcemia without meningitis, the researchers noted. “Initial symptoms of meningococcemia are often relatively mild and nonspecific and might include fever, chills, fatigue, vomiting, diarrhea, and aches or pains in the muscles, joints, chest, or abdomen; however, these symptoms can progress to severe illness and death within hours.”
Eculizumab (Soliris, Alexion Pharmaceuticals) is licensed in the United States for treatment of paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria and atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome, two diseases that are rare and can be fatal.
Eculizumab is associated with a 1,000-fold to 2,000-fold increased incidence of meningococcal disease among persons receiving the drug. The Food and Drug Administration–approved prescribing information includes a boxed warning regarding increased risk for meningococcal disease.
The CDC is collecting reports from state health departments for further analysis of the risk among eculizumab recipients.
The researchers reported having no conflicts of interest.
ezimmerman@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @eaztweets
FROM MMWR
FDA approves first new drug for sickle cell in nearly 20 years
The approval was based on placebo-controlled phase II and phase III trials suggesting that L-glutamate offered moderate benefit to patients with this rare, serious, and potentially fatal blood disorder.
L-glutamine oral powder will be marketed under the brand name Endari by Emmaus Medical. The FDA granted the approval through its orphan drug pathway, which is reserved for treatments of rare diseases or conditions. The National Institutes of Health estimates that sickle cell disorder affects approximately 100,000 individuals in the United States. Previously, the only drug approved for treating sickle cell disorder was hydroxyurea, which the FDA green-lighted in 1998.
The randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III trial on which the approval of L-glutamine was based (GLUSCC09-01) comprised patients aged 5-58 years with sickle cell disease or beta-0 thalassemia who had at least two episodes of painful crises during the 12 months before screening. A total of 152 patients were randomly assigned to receive oral L-glutamine (0.3 mg/kg per day) for 48 weeks followed by a 3-week tapering period, while 78 patients received placebo. Patients who received L-glutamine averaged three hospital visits for painful crises for which they received parenteral narcotics or ketorolac, while the placebo group averaged four such hospital visits. Additionally, the time to second crisis was delayed by 79 days in the treatment group, compared with the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.68).
L-glutamine also was associated with fewer hospital days (median 6.5 vs. 11 days) and fewer occurrences of potentially life-threatening acute chest syndrome (8.6% vs. 23.1%), investigators reported to the FDA’s Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee during a meeting on May 24.
Safety studies of L-glutamine included phase II and phase III data from 187 patients who received L-glutamine and 111 patients who received placebo, the investigators reported. Based on these analyses, rates of sickle cell anemia with crisis were 66% in the treatment population and 72% in placebo recipients. Rates of acute chest syndrome were 7% and 19%, respectively. Treatment-emergent adverse events led patients to drop out of the studies in 2.7% and 0.9% of cases. The most common adverse events of L-glutamine therapy were constipation, nausea, headache, cough, pain in the extremities, back pain, chest pain, and abdominal pain.
The FDA advisory committee voted 10-3 in favor of approving L-glutamate after hearing from industry and FDA representatives, physicians who treat patients with sickle cell disorder, and patients and their family members at the May 24 meeting. “No” voters expressed concerns about differing drop-out rates between the study groups, but other committee members emphasized the severe impact of sickle cell disorder on quality of life and the crucial need for more treatments.
The FDA Orphan Products Grants Program provided some of the funding to develop the drug. The FDA committee members had no relevant conflicts of interests.
The approval was based on placebo-controlled phase II and phase III trials suggesting that L-glutamate offered moderate benefit to patients with this rare, serious, and potentially fatal blood disorder.
L-glutamine oral powder will be marketed under the brand name Endari by Emmaus Medical. The FDA granted the approval through its orphan drug pathway, which is reserved for treatments of rare diseases or conditions. The National Institutes of Health estimates that sickle cell disorder affects approximately 100,000 individuals in the United States. Previously, the only drug approved for treating sickle cell disorder was hydroxyurea, which the FDA green-lighted in 1998.
The randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III trial on which the approval of L-glutamine was based (GLUSCC09-01) comprised patients aged 5-58 years with sickle cell disease or beta-0 thalassemia who had at least two episodes of painful crises during the 12 months before screening. A total of 152 patients were randomly assigned to receive oral L-glutamine (0.3 mg/kg per day) for 48 weeks followed by a 3-week tapering period, while 78 patients received placebo. Patients who received L-glutamine averaged three hospital visits for painful crises for which they received parenteral narcotics or ketorolac, while the placebo group averaged four such hospital visits. Additionally, the time to second crisis was delayed by 79 days in the treatment group, compared with the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.68).
L-glutamine also was associated with fewer hospital days (median 6.5 vs. 11 days) and fewer occurrences of potentially life-threatening acute chest syndrome (8.6% vs. 23.1%), investigators reported to the FDA’s Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee during a meeting on May 24.
Safety studies of L-glutamine included phase II and phase III data from 187 patients who received L-glutamine and 111 patients who received placebo, the investigators reported. Based on these analyses, rates of sickle cell anemia with crisis were 66% in the treatment population and 72% in placebo recipients. Rates of acute chest syndrome were 7% and 19%, respectively. Treatment-emergent adverse events led patients to drop out of the studies in 2.7% and 0.9% of cases. The most common adverse events of L-glutamine therapy were constipation, nausea, headache, cough, pain in the extremities, back pain, chest pain, and abdominal pain.
The FDA advisory committee voted 10-3 in favor of approving L-glutamate after hearing from industry and FDA representatives, physicians who treat patients with sickle cell disorder, and patients and their family members at the May 24 meeting. “No” voters expressed concerns about differing drop-out rates between the study groups, but other committee members emphasized the severe impact of sickle cell disorder on quality of life and the crucial need for more treatments.
The FDA Orphan Products Grants Program provided some of the funding to develop the drug. The FDA committee members had no relevant conflicts of interests.
The approval was based on placebo-controlled phase II and phase III trials suggesting that L-glutamate offered moderate benefit to patients with this rare, serious, and potentially fatal blood disorder.
L-glutamine oral powder will be marketed under the brand name Endari by Emmaus Medical. The FDA granted the approval through its orphan drug pathway, which is reserved for treatments of rare diseases or conditions. The National Institutes of Health estimates that sickle cell disorder affects approximately 100,000 individuals in the United States. Previously, the only drug approved for treating sickle cell disorder was hydroxyurea, which the FDA green-lighted in 1998.
The randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III trial on which the approval of L-glutamine was based (GLUSCC09-01) comprised patients aged 5-58 years with sickle cell disease or beta-0 thalassemia who had at least two episodes of painful crises during the 12 months before screening. A total of 152 patients were randomly assigned to receive oral L-glutamine (0.3 mg/kg per day) for 48 weeks followed by a 3-week tapering period, while 78 patients received placebo. Patients who received L-glutamine averaged three hospital visits for painful crises for which they received parenteral narcotics or ketorolac, while the placebo group averaged four such hospital visits. Additionally, the time to second crisis was delayed by 79 days in the treatment group, compared with the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.68).
L-glutamine also was associated with fewer hospital days (median 6.5 vs. 11 days) and fewer occurrences of potentially life-threatening acute chest syndrome (8.6% vs. 23.1%), investigators reported to the FDA’s Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee during a meeting on May 24.
Safety studies of L-glutamine included phase II and phase III data from 187 patients who received L-glutamine and 111 patients who received placebo, the investigators reported. Based on these analyses, rates of sickle cell anemia with crisis were 66% in the treatment population and 72% in placebo recipients. Rates of acute chest syndrome were 7% and 19%, respectively. Treatment-emergent adverse events led patients to drop out of the studies in 2.7% and 0.9% of cases. The most common adverse events of L-glutamine therapy were constipation, nausea, headache, cough, pain in the extremities, back pain, chest pain, and abdominal pain.
The FDA advisory committee voted 10-3 in favor of approving L-glutamate after hearing from industry and FDA representatives, physicians who treat patients with sickle cell disorder, and patients and their family members at the May 24 meeting. “No” voters expressed concerns about differing drop-out rates between the study groups, but other committee members emphasized the severe impact of sickle cell disorder on quality of life and the crucial need for more treatments.
The FDA Orphan Products Grants Program provided some of the funding to develop the drug. The FDA committee members had no relevant conflicts of interests.
Opioid prescribing drops nationally, remains high in some counties
Opioid prescribing in the United States declined overall between 2010 and 2015, but remained stable or increased in some counties, according to a report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The findings were published online in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.
“The bottom line remains: We have too many people getting too many prescriptions at too high a dose,” Anne Schuchat, MD, acting director of the CDC, said in a July 6 teleconference.
CDC researchers calculated prescribing rates from 2006 to 2015 by dividing the number of opioid prescriptions by the population estimates from the U.S. census for each year and created quartiles using morphine milligram equivalent per capita to analyze opioid distribution. Annual opioid prescribing rates increased from 72 to 81 prescriptions per 100 persons from 2006 to 2010 and remained relatively constant from 2010 to 2012 before showing a 13% decrease to 71 prescriptions per 100 persons from 2012 to 2015 (MMWR. 2017 Jul 7;66[26]:697-704. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6626a4).
But despite these overall declines, “We are now experiencing the highest overdose death rates ever recorded in the United States,” Dr. Schuchat said. Quartiles were created using MME per capita to characterize the distribution of opioids prescribed.
In the report, areas associated with higher opioid prescribing rates on a county level included small cities or towns, areas that had a higher proportion of white residents, areas with more doctors and dentists, and areas with more cases of arthritis, diabetes, or other disabilities, she said.
The findings suggest a need for more consistency among health care providers about prescription opioids, Dr. Schuchat said. “Clinical practice is all over the place, which is a sign that you need better standards; we hope the 2016 guidelines are a turning point for better prescribing,” she said.
The CDC’s guidelines on opioid prescribing were released in 2016. The guidelines recommend alternatives when possible. Clinicians should instead consider nonopioid therapy, other types of pain medication, and nondrug pain relief options, such as physical therapy and cognitive-behavioral therapy. Other concerns include the length and strength of opioid prescriptions. Even taking opioids for a few months increases the risk for addiction, Dr. Schuchat said.
“Physicians must continue to lead efforts to reverse the epidemic by using prescription drug–monitoring programs, eliminating stigma, prescribing the overdose reversal drug naloxone, and enhancing their education about safe opioid prescribing and effective pain management,” Patrice A. Harris, MD, chair of the American Medical Association Opioid Task Force, said in a statement in response to the report. “Our country must do more to provide evidence-based, comprehensive treatment for pain and for substance use disorders,” she said.
“We really encourage clinicians to look to the guidelines and the tools that are available,” Dr. Schuchat said. “We do know that internists and other primary care physicians prescribe most of the opioids, so it is important for them to be aware.” The CDC has developed a checklist and a mobile app that have been downloaded by thousands of clinicians so far, she noted. Changes in annual prescribing hold promise that practices can improve, she said.
The researchers reported no conflicts of interest.
Opioid prescribing in the United States declined overall between 2010 and 2015, but remained stable or increased in some counties, according to a report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The findings were published online in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.
“The bottom line remains: We have too many people getting too many prescriptions at too high a dose,” Anne Schuchat, MD, acting director of the CDC, said in a July 6 teleconference.
CDC researchers calculated prescribing rates from 2006 to 2015 by dividing the number of opioid prescriptions by the population estimates from the U.S. census for each year and created quartiles using morphine milligram equivalent per capita to analyze opioid distribution. Annual opioid prescribing rates increased from 72 to 81 prescriptions per 100 persons from 2006 to 2010 and remained relatively constant from 2010 to 2012 before showing a 13% decrease to 71 prescriptions per 100 persons from 2012 to 2015 (MMWR. 2017 Jul 7;66[26]:697-704. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6626a4).
But despite these overall declines, “We are now experiencing the highest overdose death rates ever recorded in the United States,” Dr. Schuchat said. Quartiles were created using MME per capita to characterize the distribution of opioids prescribed.
In the report, areas associated with higher opioid prescribing rates on a county level included small cities or towns, areas that had a higher proportion of white residents, areas with more doctors and dentists, and areas with more cases of arthritis, diabetes, or other disabilities, she said.
The findings suggest a need for more consistency among health care providers about prescription opioids, Dr. Schuchat said. “Clinical practice is all over the place, which is a sign that you need better standards; we hope the 2016 guidelines are a turning point for better prescribing,” she said.
The CDC’s guidelines on opioid prescribing were released in 2016. The guidelines recommend alternatives when possible. Clinicians should instead consider nonopioid therapy, other types of pain medication, and nondrug pain relief options, such as physical therapy and cognitive-behavioral therapy. Other concerns include the length and strength of opioid prescriptions. Even taking opioids for a few months increases the risk for addiction, Dr. Schuchat said.
“Physicians must continue to lead efforts to reverse the epidemic by using prescription drug–monitoring programs, eliminating stigma, prescribing the overdose reversal drug naloxone, and enhancing their education about safe opioid prescribing and effective pain management,” Patrice A. Harris, MD, chair of the American Medical Association Opioid Task Force, said in a statement in response to the report. “Our country must do more to provide evidence-based, comprehensive treatment for pain and for substance use disorders,” she said.
“We really encourage clinicians to look to the guidelines and the tools that are available,” Dr. Schuchat said. “We do know that internists and other primary care physicians prescribe most of the opioids, so it is important for them to be aware.” The CDC has developed a checklist and a mobile app that have been downloaded by thousands of clinicians so far, she noted. Changes in annual prescribing hold promise that practices can improve, she said.
The researchers reported no conflicts of interest.
Opioid prescribing in the United States declined overall between 2010 and 2015, but remained stable or increased in some counties, according to a report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The findings were published online in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.
“The bottom line remains: We have too many people getting too many prescriptions at too high a dose,” Anne Schuchat, MD, acting director of the CDC, said in a July 6 teleconference.
CDC researchers calculated prescribing rates from 2006 to 2015 by dividing the number of opioid prescriptions by the population estimates from the U.S. census for each year and created quartiles using morphine milligram equivalent per capita to analyze opioid distribution. Annual opioid prescribing rates increased from 72 to 81 prescriptions per 100 persons from 2006 to 2010 and remained relatively constant from 2010 to 2012 before showing a 13% decrease to 71 prescriptions per 100 persons from 2012 to 2015 (MMWR. 2017 Jul 7;66[26]:697-704. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6626a4).
But despite these overall declines, “We are now experiencing the highest overdose death rates ever recorded in the United States,” Dr. Schuchat said. Quartiles were created using MME per capita to characterize the distribution of opioids prescribed.
In the report, areas associated with higher opioid prescribing rates on a county level included small cities or towns, areas that had a higher proportion of white residents, areas with more doctors and dentists, and areas with more cases of arthritis, diabetes, or other disabilities, she said.
The findings suggest a need for more consistency among health care providers about prescription opioids, Dr. Schuchat said. “Clinical practice is all over the place, which is a sign that you need better standards; we hope the 2016 guidelines are a turning point for better prescribing,” she said.
The CDC’s guidelines on opioid prescribing were released in 2016. The guidelines recommend alternatives when possible. Clinicians should instead consider nonopioid therapy, other types of pain medication, and nondrug pain relief options, such as physical therapy and cognitive-behavioral therapy. Other concerns include the length and strength of opioid prescriptions. Even taking opioids for a few months increases the risk for addiction, Dr. Schuchat said.
“Physicians must continue to lead efforts to reverse the epidemic by using prescription drug–monitoring programs, eliminating stigma, prescribing the overdose reversal drug naloxone, and enhancing their education about safe opioid prescribing and effective pain management,” Patrice A. Harris, MD, chair of the American Medical Association Opioid Task Force, said in a statement in response to the report. “Our country must do more to provide evidence-based, comprehensive treatment for pain and for substance use disorders,” she said.
“We really encourage clinicians to look to the guidelines and the tools that are available,” Dr. Schuchat said. “We do know that internists and other primary care physicians prescribe most of the opioids, so it is important for them to be aware.” The CDC has developed a checklist and a mobile app that have been downloaded by thousands of clinicians so far, she noted. Changes in annual prescribing hold promise that practices can improve, she said.
The researchers reported no conflicts of interest.
FROM MMWR
FDA approves abatacept for adults with psoriatic arthritis
The Food and Drug Administration has approved abatacept, a selective T-cell costimulation modulator, for treating adults with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA), the manufacturer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, has announced.
Approval of abatacept (Orencia) was based on two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (PsA-I and PsA-II) in 594 adults with PsA for more than 7 years, according to the July 6 announcement. Patients had active PsA (at least three swollen joints and at least three tender joints), despite previous disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy and had one qualifying psoriatic skin lesion measuring at least 2 cm in diameter. The studies included patients treated with TNF inhibitors (TNFi) previously.
In the PsA-II trial, 424 patients received weekly doses of placebo or abatacept 25 mg administered subcutaneously (SC) without a loading dose for 24 weeks, followed by open-label abatacept at a dose of 125 mg SC weekly.
Compared with those on placebo, more patients treated with abatacept 10 mg/kg IV or 125 mg SC achieved an ACR 20 (American College of Rheumatology 20) response at 24 weeks: 47.5% vs. 19.0% and 39.4% vs. 22.3%, respectively (P less than .05).
Other results included a greater proportion of abatacept SC patients with at least a 0.35 decrease from baseline on the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index: 31% vs. 24% on placebo at 24 weeks. Responses were seen regardless of prior anti-TNFi treatment and regardless of concomitant non-biologic DMARD treatment. In addition, patients on abatacept IV and SC had improvements in enthesitis and dactylitis at 24 weeks.
The safety profile of abatacept in the two studies was “consistent with the safety profile” in rheumatoid arthritis, according to the company release.
Abatacept, initially approved in 2005, was previously approved for RA in adults and for juvenile idiopathic arthritis
Find the updated prescribing information for abatacept here.
The Food and Drug Administration has approved abatacept, a selective T-cell costimulation modulator, for treating adults with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA), the manufacturer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, has announced.
Approval of abatacept (Orencia) was based on two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (PsA-I and PsA-II) in 594 adults with PsA for more than 7 years, according to the July 6 announcement. Patients had active PsA (at least three swollen joints and at least three tender joints), despite previous disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy and had one qualifying psoriatic skin lesion measuring at least 2 cm in diameter. The studies included patients treated with TNF inhibitors (TNFi) previously.
In the PsA-II trial, 424 patients received weekly doses of placebo or abatacept 25 mg administered subcutaneously (SC) without a loading dose for 24 weeks, followed by open-label abatacept at a dose of 125 mg SC weekly.
Compared with those on placebo, more patients treated with abatacept 10 mg/kg IV or 125 mg SC achieved an ACR 20 (American College of Rheumatology 20) response at 24 weeks: 47.5% vs. 19.0% and 39.4% vs. 22.3%, respectively (P less than .05).
Other results included a greater proportion of abatacept SC patients with at least a 0.35 decrease from baseline on the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index: 31% vs. 24% on placebo at 24 weeks. Responses were seen regardless of prior anti-TNFi treatment and regardless of concomitant non-biologic DMARD treatment. In addition, patients on abatacept IV and SC had improvements in enthesitis and dactylitis at 24 weeks.
The safety profile of abatacept in the two studies was “consistent with the safety profile” in rheumatoid arthritis, according to the company release.
Abatacept, initially approved in 2005, was previously approved for RA in adults and for juvenile idiopathic arthritis
Find the updated prescribing information for abatacept here.
The Food and Drug Administration has approved abatacept, a selective T-cell costimulation modulator, for treating adults with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA), the manufacturer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, has announced.
Approval of abatacept (Orencia) was based on two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (PsA-I and PsA-II) in 594 adults with PsA for more than 7 years, according to the July 6 announcement. Patients had active PsA (at least three swollen joints and at least three tender joints), despite previous disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy and had one qualifying psoriatic skin lesion measuring at least 2 cm in diameter. The studies included patients treated with TNF inhibitors (TNFi) previously.
In the PsA-II trial, 424 patients received weekly doses of placebo or abatacept 25 mg administered subcutaneously (SC) without a loading dose for 24 weeks, followed by open-label abatacept at a dose of 125 mg SC weekly.
Compared with those on placebo, more patients treated with abatacept 10 mg/kg IV or 125 mg SC achieved an ACR 20 (American College of Rheumatology 20) response at 24 weeks: 47.5% vs. 19.0% and 39.4% vs. 22.3%, respectively (P less than .05).
Other results included a greater proportion of abatacept SC patients with at least a 0.35 decrease from baseline on the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index: 31% vs. 24% on placebo at 24 weeks. Responses were seen regardless of prior anti-TNFi treatment and regardless of concomitant non-biologic DMARD treatment. In addition, patients on abatacept IV and SC had improvements in enthesitis and dactylitis at 24 weeks.
The safety profile of abatacept in the two studies was “consistent with the safety profile” in rheumatoid arthritis, according to the company release.
Abatacept, initially approved in 2005, was previously approved for RA in adults and for juvenile idiopathic arthritis
Find the updated prescribing information for abatacept here.
Endo removes Opana ER from market
Even as it defended the product’s safety when appropriately used, Endo International withdrew from the market its long-acting opioid agonist Opana ER, in compliance with a June 8 Food and Drug Administration request. The company “continues to believe in the safety, efficacy, and favorable benefit-risk profile of Opana ER (oxymorphone hydrochloride extended release) when used as intended, and notes that the company has taken significant steps over the years to combat misuse and abuse,” according to a news release posted on Endo’s website. “Nevertheless, after careful consideration and consultation with the FDA following [its] June 2017 withdrawal request, the company has decided to voluntarily remove Opana ER from the market.”
In fact, the data showed a significant shift in the route of abuse of Opana ER from nasal to injection following the product’s reformulation. Injection abuse of reformulated Opana ER has been associated with a serious outbreak of HIV and hepatitis C, as well as cases of a thrombotic microangiopathy.
Endo said it will work with FDA to coordinate a smooth removal of the product, and insisted that the drug is safe and effective.
“Endo reiterates that neither the FDA’s withdrawal request nor Endo’s decision to voluntarily remove Opana ER from the market reflect a finding that the product is not safe or effective when taken as prescribed. To the contrary, Endo remains confident in the clinical research and other data demonstrating Opana ER’s safety and efficacy, as well as its favorable risk-benefit profile when used as intended in appropriate patients.”
Opana ER was first approved in 2006 for the management of moderate to severe pain when a continuous, around-the-clock opioid analgesic is needed for an extended period of time. It was reformulated in 2012, with the intent of making it “resistant to physical and chemical manipulation for abuse by snorting or injecting,” according to the FDA release.
On Twitter @Alz_gal
Even as it defended the product’s safety when appropriately used, Endo International withdrew from the market its long-acting opioid agonist Opana ER, in compliance with a June 8 Food and Drug Administration request. The company “continues to believe in the safety, efficacy, and favorable benefit-risk profile of Opana ER (oxymorphone hydrochloride extended release) when used as intended, and notes that the company has taken significant steps over the years to combat misuse and abuse,” according to a news release posted on Endo’s website. “Nevertheless, after careful consideration and consultation with the FDA following [its] June 2017 withdrawal request, the company has decided to voluntarily remove Opana ER from the market.”
In fact, the data showed a significant shift in the route of abuse of Opana ER from nasal to injection following the product’s reformulation. Injection abuse of reformulated Opana ER has been associated with a serious outbreak of HIV and hepatitis C, as well as cases of a thrombotic microangiopathy.
Endo said it will work with FDA to coordinate a smooth removal of the product, and insisted that the drug is safe and effective.
“Endo reiterates that neither the FDA’s withdrawal request nor Endo’s decision to voluntarily remove Opana ER from the market reflect a finding that the product is not safe or effective when taken as prescribed. To the contrary, Endo remains confident in the clinical research and other data demonstrating Opana ER’s safety and efficacy, as well as its favorable risk-benefit profile when used as intended in appropriate patients.”
Opana ER was first approved in 2006 for the management of moderate to severe pain when a continuous, around-the-clock opioid analgesic is needed for an extended period of time. It was reformulated in 2012, with the intent of making it “resistant to physical and chemical manipulation for abuse by snorting or injecting,” according to the FDA release.
On Twitter @Alz_gal
Even as it defended the product’s safety when appropriately used, Endo International withdrew from the market its long-acting opioid agonist Opana ER, in compliance with a June 8 Food and Drug Administration request. The company “continues to believe in the safety, efficacy, and favorable benefit-risk profile of Opana ER (oxymorphone hydrochloride extended release) when used as intended, and notes that the company has taken significant steps over the years to combat misuse and abuse,” according to a news release posted on Endo’s website. “Nevertheless, after careful consideration and consultation with the FDA following [its] June 2017 withdrawal request, the company has decided to voluntarily remove Opana ER from the market.”
In fact, the data showed a significant shift in the route of abuse of Opana ER from nasal to injection following the product’s reformulation. Injection abuse of reformulated Opana ER has been associated with a serious outbreak of HIV and hepatitis C, as well as cases of a thrombotic microangiopathy.
Endo said it will work with FDA to coordinate a smooth removal of the product, and insisted that the drug is safe and effective.
“Endo reiterates that neither the FDA’s withdrawal request nor Endo’s decision to voluntarily remove Opana ER from the market reflect a finding that the product is not safe or effective when taken as prescribed. To the contrary, Endo remains confident in the clinical research and other data demonstrating Opana ER’s safety and efficacy, as well as its favorable risk-benefit profile when used as intended in appropriate patients.”
Opana ER was first approved in 2006 for the management of moderate to severe pain when a continuous, around-the-clock opioid analgesic is needed for an extended period of time. It was reformulated in 2012, with the intent of making it “resistant to physical and chemical manipulation for abuse by snorting or injecting,” according to the FDA release.
On Twitter @Alz_gal
FDA approves new panel to identify mCRC patients for panitumumab treatment
The Food and Drug Administration has approved the Praxis Extended RAS Panel for the identification of metastatic colorectal cancer patients who can be treated with panitumumab.
The Praxis Extended RAS Panel is able to detect 56 specific mutations in the RAS genes of mCRC patients, and is the first next generation sequencing test approved by the FDA capable of testing more than one RAS gene mutation. If RAS mutations are not detected, then panitumumab is indicated, and if a mutation is detected, panitumumab is not indicated, according to the FDA statement.
“Panitumumab’s product labeling has been modified to align the indication for panitumumab and intended use for the Praxis Extended RAS Panel,” the FDA noted.
The Food and Drug Administration has approved the Praxis Extended RAS Panel for the identification of metastatic colorectal cancer patients who can be treated with panitumumab.
The Praxis Extended RAS Panel is able to detect 56 specific mutations in the RAS genes of mCRC patients, and is the first next generation sequencing test approved by the FDA capable of testing more than one RAS gene mutation. If RAS mutations are not detected, then panitumumab is indicated, and if a mutation is detected, panitumumab is not indicated, according to the FDA statement.
“Panitumumab’s product labeling has been modified to align the indication for panitumumab and intended use for the Praxis Extended RAS Panel,” the FDA noted.
The Food and Drug Administration has approved the Praxis Extended RAS Panel for the identification of metastatic colorectal cancer patients who can be treated with panitumumab.
The Praxis Extended RAS Panel is able to detect 56 specific mutations in the RAS genes of mCRC patients, and is the first next generation sequencing test approved by the FDA capable of testing more than one RAS gene mutation. If RAS mutations are not detected, then panitumumab is indicated, and if a mutation is detected, panitumumab is not indicated, according to the FDA statement.
“Panitumumab’s product labeling has been modified to align the indication for panitumumab and intended use for the Praxis Extended RAS Panel,” the FDA noted.
FDA approves betrixaban for VTE prophylaxis
Betrixaban, a factor Xa inhibitor, has been approved for the prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in at-risk adult patients hospitalized with an acute illness, according to an announcement from the Food and Drug Administration.
Approval was based on results from a randomized, double-blind clinical trial in which over 7,000 hospitalized patients at risk for VTE received either extended-duration betrixaban (35-42 days) or short duration enoxaparin (6-14 days), a low molecular weight heparin administered subcutaneously. The rate of deep vein thrombosis, nonfatal pulmonary embolism, or VTE-related death was 4.4% among patients receiving betrixaban and 6% among patients receiving enoxaparin (relative risk, 0.75; 95% confidence interval: 0.61, 0.91).
The recommended dosage for betrixaban is 80 mg per day for 35-42 days at the same time every day with food, after a dose of 160 mg on the first day of treatment.
Betrixaban will be marketed as Bevyxxa by Portola.
Find the full FDA announcement and prescribing information on the FDA website.
Betrixaban, a factor Xa inhibitor, has been approved for the prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in at-risk adult patients hospitalized with an acute illness, according to an announcement from the Food and Drug Administration.
Approval was based on results from a randomized, double-blind clinical trial in which over 7,000 hospitalized patients at risk for VTE received either extended-duration betrixaban (35-42 days) or short duration enoxaparin (6-14 days), a low molecular weight heparin administered subcutaneously. The rate of deep vein thrombosis, nonfatal pulmonary embolism, or VTE-related death was 4.4% among patients receiving betrixaban and 6% among patients receiving enoxaparin (relative risk, 0.75; 95% confidence interval: 0.61, 0.91).
The recommended dosage for betrixaban is 80 mg per day for 35-42 days at the same time every day with food, after a dose of 160 mg on the first day of treatment.
Betrixaban will be marketed as Bevyxxa by Portola.
Find the full FDA announcement and prescribing information on the FDA website.
Betrixaban, a factor Xa inhibitor, has been approved for the prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in at-risk adult patients hospitalized with an acute illness, according to an announcement from the Food and Drug Administration.
Approval was based on results from a randomized, double-blind clinical trial in which over 7,000 hospitalized patients at risk for VTE received either extended-duration betrixaban (35-42 days) or short duration enoxaparin (6-14 days), a low molecular weight heparin administered subcutaneously. The rate of deep vein thrombosis, nonfatal pulmonary embolism, or VTE-related death was 4.4% among patients receiving betrixaban and 6% among patients receiving enoxaparin (relative risk, 0.75; 95% confidence interval: 0.61, 0.91).
The recommended dosage for betrixaban is 80 mg per day for 35-42 days at the same time every day with food, after a dose of 160 mg on the first day of treatment.
Betrixaban will be marketed as Bevyxxa by Portola.
Find the full FDA announcement and prescribing information on the FDA website.
FDA approves dabrafenib and trametinib for BRAF V600E+ metastatic NSCLC
The FDA also approved a diagnostic, the Oncomine Dx Target Test, a next-generation sequencing test to detect gene mutations or alterations, including BRAF, from a single tissue specimen, the FDA reported in a statement.
The approvals are based on overall response rate (ORR) for the combination in a phase II, nonrandomized, noncomparative, open-label trial of patients with locally confirmed BRAF V600E mutation-positive metastatic NSCLC. The ORR for the combination treatment was 61% (95% confidence interval, 44%-77%) among 36 patients who had received no prior systemic therapy for metastatic NSCLC, and 63% (95% CI, 49%-76%) among 57 patients who had received at least one platinum-based chemotherapy regimen with demonstrated disease progression before enrollment. Those 93 patients were all treated with the combination of dabrafenib (150 mg orally twice daily) and trametinib (2 mg orally once daily).
The ORR was 27% (95% CI, 18%-38%) among a third cohort of 78 patients with previously treated BRAF V600E mutation-positive NSCLC who received single-agent dabrafenib.
The most common adverse reactions were similar to those reported in prior approvals for patients with melanoma, including pyrexia, fatigue, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, dry skin, decreased appetite, edema, rash, chills, hemorrhage, cough, and dyspnea. The most common grade 3-4 adverse reactions were pyrexia, fatigue, dyspnea, vomiting, rash, hemorrhage, and diarrhea. The most common grade 3-4 laboratory abnormalities were hyponatremia, lymphopenia, anemia, hyperglycemia, neutropenia, leukopenia, hypophosphatemia, and increased alanine aminotransferase. Dabrafenib and trametinib were discontinued for adverse reactions in 18% and 19% of patients, respectively, the FDA said.
Novartis is marketing Dabrafenib as Tafinlar and trametinib as Mekinist.
The recommended doses are dabrafenib 150 mg orally twice daily, approximately 12 hours apart, with trametinib 2 mg orally once daily, following confirmation of BRAF V600E mutation in a tumor specimen by an FDA-approved test.
The FDA also approved a diagnostic, the Oncomine Dx Target Test, a next-generation sequencing test to detect gene mutations or alterations, including BRAF, from a single tissue specimen, the FDA reported in a statement.
The approvals are based on overall response rate (ORR) for the combination in a phase II, nonrandomized, noncomparative, open-label trial of patients with locally confirmed BRAF V600E mutation-positive metastatic NSCLC. The ORR for the combination treatment was 61% (95% confidence interval, 44%-77%) among 36 patients who had received no prior systemic therapy for metastatic NSCLC, and 63% (95% CI, 49%-76%) among 57 patients who had received at least one platinum-based chemotherapy regimen with demonstrated disease progression before enrollment. Those 93 patients were all treated with the combination of dabrafenib (150 mg orally twice daily) and trametinib (2 mg orally once daily).
The ORR was 27% (95% CI, 18%-38%) among a third cohort of 78 patients with previously treated BRAF V600E mutation-positive NSCLC who received single-agent dabrafenib.
The most common adverse reactions were similar to those reported in prior approvals for patients with melanoma, including pyrexia, fatigue, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, dry skin, decreased appetite, edema, rash, chills, hemorrhage, cough, and dyspnea. The most common grade 3-4 adverse reactions were pyrexia, fatigue, dyspnea, vomiting, rash, hemorrhage, and diarrhea. The most common grade 3-4 laboratory abnormalities were hyponatremia, lymphopenia, anemia, hyperglycemia, neutropenia, leukopenia, hypophosphatemia, and increased alanine aminotransferase. Dabrafenib and trametinib were discontinued for adverse reactions in 18% and 19% of patients, respectively, the FDA said.
Novartis is marketing Dabrafenib as Tafinlar and trametinib as Mekinist.
The recommended doses are dabrafenib 150 mg orally twice daily, approximately 12 hours apart, with trametinib 2 mg orally once daily, following confirmation of BRAF V600E mutation in a tumor specimen by an FDA-approved test.
The FDA also approved a diagnostic, the Oncomine Dx Target Test, a next-generation sequencing test to detect gene mutations or alterations, including BRAF, from a single tissue specimen, the FDA reported in a statement.
The approvals are based on overall response rate (ORR) for the combination in a phase II, nonrandomized, noncomparative, open-label trial of patients with locally confirmed BRAF V600E mutation-positive metastatic NSCLC. The ORR for the combination treatment was 61% (95% confidence interval, 44%-77%) among 36 patients who had received no prior systemic therapy for metastatic NSCLC, and 63% (95% CI, 49%-76%) among 57 patients who had received at least one platinum-based chemotherapy regimen with demonstrated disease progression before enrollment. Those 93 patients were all treated with the combination of dabrafenib (150 mg orally twice daily) and trametinib (2 mg orally once daily).
The ORR was 27% (95% CI, 18%-38%) among a third cohort of 78 patients with previously treated BRAF V600E mutation-positive NSCLC who received single-agent dabrafenib.
The most common adverse reactions were similar to those reported in prior approvals for patients with melanoma, including pyrexia, fatigue, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, dry skin, decreased appetite, edema, rash, chills, hemorrhage, cough, and dyspnea. The most common grade 3-4 adverse reactions were pyrexia, fatigue, dyspnea, vomiting, rash, hemorrhage, and diarrhea. The most common grade 3-4 laboratory abnormalities were hyponatremia, lymphopenia, anemia, hyperglycemia, neutropenia, leukopenia, hypophosphatemia, and increased alanine aminotransferase. Dabrafenib and trametinib were discontinued for adverse reactions in 18% and 19% of patients, respectively, the FDA said.
Novartis is marketing Dabrafenib as Tafinlar and trametinib as Mekinist.
The recommended doses are dabrafenib 150 mg orally twice daily, approximately 12 hours apart, with trametinib 2 mg orally once daily, following confirmation of BRAF V600E mutation in a tumor specimen by an FDA-approved test.
FDA approves rituximab + hyaluronidase human for FL, DLBCL, and CLL
The Food and Drug Administration has approved rituximab plus hyaluronidase human for adult patients with follicular lymphoma (FL), diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).
The combination product, to be marketed as Rituxan Hycela, is administered subcutaneously, shortening administration time to 5 to 7 minutes as compared with the several hours needed for intravenous infusion, the FDA said in a statement.
Approval was based on noninferior rituximab trough concentrations for the subcutaneously administered combination, compared with intravenous rituximab, and comparable efficacy and safety results as shown in multiple randomized clinical trials.
The most common adverse events seen with the combination in patients with FL included infections, neutropenia, nausea, constipation, cough, and fatigue. In patients with DLBCL, the most common adverse events were infections, neutropenia, alopecia, nausea, and anemia; in CLL patients, infections, neutropenia, nausea, thrombocytopenia, pyrexia, vomiting, and injection site erythema occurred most commonly.
The combination is indicated for the following previously approved indications for rituximab:
- Relapsed or refractory FL as a single agent.
- Previously untreated FL in combination with first line chemotherapy and, in patients achieving a complete or partial response to rituximab in combination with chemotherapy, as single-agent maintenance therapy.
- Nonprogressing (including stable disease) FL as a single agent after first-line cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone chemotherapy.
- Previously untreated DLBCL in combination with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone or other anthracycline-based chemotherapy regimens.
- Previously untreated and previously treated CLL in combination with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide.
The recommended doses are 1,400 mg rituximab and 23,400 units hyaluronidase human for FL and DLBCL and 1,600 mg rituximab and 26,800 units hyaluronidase human for CLL. The combination treatment should be initiated only after patients have received at least one full dose of a rituximab product by intravenous infusion, according to the prescribing information.
Rituxan Hycela is marketed by Genentech.
The Food and Drug Administration has approved rituximab plus hyaluronidase human for adult patients with follicular lymphoma (FL), diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).
The combination product, to be marketed as Rituxan Hycela, is administered subcutaneously, shortening administration time to 5 to 7 minutes as compared with the several hours needed for intravenous infusion, the FDA said in a statement.
Approval was based on noninferior rituximab trough concentrations for the subcutaneously administered combination, compared with intravenous rituximab, and comparable efficacy and safety results as shown in multiple randomized clinical trials.
The most common adverse events seen with the combination in patients with FL included infections, neutropenia, nausea, constipation, cough, and fatigue. In patients with DLBCL, the most common adverse events were infections, neutropenia, alopecia, nausea, and anemia; in CLL patients, infections, neutropenia, nausea, thrombocytopenia, pyrexia, vomiting, and injection site erythema occurred most commonly.
The combination is indicated for the following previously approved indications for rituximab:
- Relapsed or refractory FL as a single agent.
- Previously untreated FL in combination with first line chemotherapy and, in patients achieving a complete or partial response to rituximab in combination with chemotherapy, as single-agent maintenance therapy.
- Nonprogressing (including stable disease) FL as a single agent after first-line cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone chemotherapy.
- Previously untreated DLBCL in combination with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone or other anthracycline-based chemotherapy regimens.
- Previously untreated and previously treated CLL in combination with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide.
The recommended doses are 1,400 mg rituximab and 23,400 units hyaluronidase human for FL and DLBCL and 1,600 mg rituximab and 26,800 units hyaluronidase human for CLL. The combination treatment should be initiated only after patients have received at least one full dose of a rituximab product by intravenous infusion, according to the prescribing information.
Rituxan Hycela is marketed by Genentech.
The Food and Drug Administration has approved rituximab plus hyaluronidase human for adult patients with follicular lymphoma (FL), diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).
The combination product, to be marketed as Rituxan Hycela, is administered subcutaneously, shortening administration time to 5 to 7 minutes as compared with the several hours needed for intravenous infusion, the FDA said in a statement.
Approval was based on noninferior rituximab trough concentrations for the subcutaneously administered combination, compared with intravenous rituximab, and comparable efficacy and safety results as shown in multiple randomized clinical trials.
The most common adverse events seen with the combination in patients with FL included infections, neutropenia, nausea, constipation, cough, and fatigue. In patients with DLBCL, the most common adverse events were infections, neutropenia, alopecia, nausea, and anemia; in CLL patients, infections, neutropenia, nausea, thrombocytopenia, pyrexia, vomiting, and injection site erythema occurred most commonly.
The combination is indicated for the following previously approved indications for rituximab:
- Relapsed or refractory FL as a single agent.
- Previously untreated FL in combination with first line chemotherapy and, in patients achieving a complete or partial response to rituximab in combination with chemotherapy, as single-agent maintenance therapy.
- Nonprogressing (including stable disease) FL as a single agent after first-line cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone chemotherapy.
- Previously untreated DLBCL in combination with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone or other anthracycline-based chemotherapy regimens.
- Previously untreated and previously treated CLL in combination with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide.
The recommended doses are 1,400 mg rituximab and 23,400 units hyaluronidase human for FL and DLBCL and 1,600 mg rituximab and 26,800 units hyaluronidase human for CLL. The combination treatment should be initiated only after patients have received at least one full dose of a rituximab product by intravenous infusion, according to the prescribing information.
Rituxan Hycela is marketed by Genentech.
ACIP approves new hepatitis A vaccine draft recommendations
, including a focus on catch-up vaccines for adolescents and those over age 40 years.
While hepatitis A cases have dropped significantly since the vaccine’s debut – with the number of reported cases in 2015 dropping to 1,390, compared with 9,606 in 1971 – previous recommendations regarding catch-up vaccinations suggested patients should consider treatment, as opposed to catch-up vaccination.
Adult catch-up vaccines now are recommended to be considered in areas with increasing disease risks, an addition that was not part of the current recommendations but has been changed because of evidence that patients over 40 years old are more vulnerable to the virus and more likely to be hospitalized if infected, said Noele Nelson, MD, PhD, of the Division of Viral Hepatitis at the CDC.
“Increasing proportions of adults in the United States are susceptible to hepatitis A ... due to reduced exposure to virus early in life and significant serum prevalence in older adults greater and equal to 40 years,” said Dr. Nelson. “In addition, there is low two-dose vaccination coverage among adults, including high risk adults, and morbidity and mortality increases with age.”
Recommendations for pregnant women also have been updated with a more definitive message. Previous recommendations advised pregnant women to weigh the options of acquiring hepatitis A against possible adverse effects of the vaccine. But, new evidence was presented at the meeting: in a study of 139 pregnant women vaccinated between 1996 and 2015 who experienced adverse effects, only seven of the effects were considered serious, and no maternal or infant deaths were apparent. In light of this, the ACIP approved the recommendation change to advise all pregnant women to be vaccinated, if they have not already been so before pregnancy.
Updates also included recommendations for patients with chronic liver disease, who are considered to be members of a high-risk population. Newly approved recommendations include a section on epidemiology, which states that, while those with chronic liver disease are not at increased risk for hepatitis A virus infection unless they experience fecal-oral exposure to the virus, those with acute hepatitis A may be more at risk to develop more severe liver disease. Recommendations for those with chronic liver disease also include a statement advising patients to seek immunoglobulin, as well as a hepatitis A, vaccination as soon as possible after exposure.
The ACIP also approved a change in recommendations to advise all residents and caretakers of those living in a group home, specifically those caring for developmentally disabled patients, to be vaccinated because of the historically high endemic nature of such institutions.
Committee members hope these new recommendations will help the United States reach its goal of a national hepatitis A case ratio of 0.3/100,000 people and a hepatitis A vaccination rate of 85%.
If these recommendations are approved by the director of the CDC and the U.S. Health Department, as they usually are, they will be published in the CDC’s Weekly Morbidity and Mortality Report.
Members of the committee reported no relevant financial disclosures.
ezimmerman@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @eaztweets
, including a focus on catch-up vaccines for adolescents and those over age 40 years.
While hepatitis A cases have dropped significantly since the vaccine’s debut – with the number of reported cases in 2015 dropping to 1,390, compared with 9,606 in 1971 – previous recommendations regarding catch-up vaccinations suggested patients should consider treatment, as opposed to catch-up vaccination.
Adult catch-up vaccines now are recommended to be considered in areas with increasing disease risks, an addition that was not part of the current recommendations but has been changed because of evidence that patients over 40 years old are more vulnerable to the virus and more likely to be hospitalized if infected, said Noele Nelson, MD, PhD, of the Division of Viral Hepatitis at the CDC.
“Increasing proportions of adults in the United States are susceptible to hepatitis A ... due to reduced exposure to virus early in life and significant serum prevalence in older adults greater and equal to 40 years,” said Dr. Nelson. “In addition, there is low two-dose vaccination coverage among adults, including high risk adults, and morbidity and mortality increases with age.”
Recommendations for pregnant women also have been updated with a more definitive message. Previous recommendations advised pregnant women to weigh the options of acquiring hepatitis A against possible adverse effects of the vaccine. But, new evidence was presented at the meeting: in a study of 139 pregnant women vaccinated between 1996 and 2015 who experienced adverse effects, only seven of the effects were considered serious, and no maternal or infant deaths were apparent. In light of this, the ACIP approved the recommendation change to advise all pregnant women to be vaccinated, if they have not already been so before pregnancy.
Updates also included recommendations for patients with chronic liver disease, who are considered to be members of a high-risk population. Newly approved recommendations include a section on epidemiology, which states that, while those with chronic liver disease are not at increased risk for hepatitis A virus infection unless they experience fecal-oral exposure to the virus, those with acute hepatitis A may be more at risk to develop more severe liver disease. Recommendations for those with chronic liver disease also include a statement advising patients to seek immunoglobulin, as well as a hepatitis A, vaccination as soon as possible after exposure.
The ACIP also approved a change in recommendations to advise all residents and caretakers of those living in a group home, specifically those caring for developmentally disabled patients, to be vaccinated because of the historically high endemic nature of such institutions.
Committee members hope these new recommendations will help the United States reach its goal of a national hepatitis A case ratio of 0.3/100,000 people and a hepatitis A vaccination rate of 85%.
If these recommendations are approved by the director of the CDC and the U.S. Health Department, as they usually are, they will be published in the CDC’s Weekly Morbidity and Mortality Report.
Members of the committee reported no relevant financial disclosures.
ezimmerman@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @eaztweets
, including a focus on catch-up vaccines for adolescents and those over age 40 years.
While hepatitis A cases have dropped significantly since the vaccine’s debut – with the number of reported cases in 2015 dropping to 1,390, compared with 9,606 in 1971 – previous recommendations regarding catch-up vaccinations suggested patients should consider treatment, as opposed to catch-up vaccination.
Adult catch-up vaccines now are recommended to be considered in areas with increasing disease risks, an addition that was not part of the current recommendations but has been changed because of evidence that patients over 40 years old are more vulnerable to the virus and more likely to be hospitalized if infected, said Noele Nelson, MD, PhD, of the Division of Viral Hepatitis at the CDC.
“Increasing proportions of adults in the United States are susceptible to hepatitis A ... due to reduced exposure to virus early in life and significant serum prevalence in older adults greater and equal to 40 years,” said Dr. Nelson. “In addition, there is low two-dose vaccination coverage among adults, including high risk adults, and morbidity and mortality increases with age.”
Recommendations for pregnant women also have been updated with a more definitive message. Previous recommendations advised pregnant women to weigh the options of acquiring hepatitis A against possible adverse effects of the vaccine. But, new evidence was presented at the meeting: in a study of 139 pregnant women vaccinated between 1996 and 2015 who experienced adverse effects, only seven of the effects were considered serious, and no maternal or infant deaths were apparent. In light of this, the ACIP approved the recommendation change to advise all pregnant women to be vaccinated, if they have not already been so before pregnancy.
Updates also included recommendations for patients with chronic liver disease, who are considered to be members of a high-risk population. Newly approved recommendations include a section on epidemiology, which states that, while those with chronic liver disease are not at increased risk for hepatitis A virus infection unless they experience fecal-oral exposure to the virus, those with acute hepatitis A may be more at risk to develop more severe liver disease. Recommendations for those with chronic liver disease also include a statement advising patients to seek immunoglobulin, as well as a hepatitis A, vaccination as soon as possible after exposure.
The ACIP also approved a change in recommendations to advise all residents and caretakers of those living in a group home, specifically those caring for developmentally disabled patients, to be vaccinated because of the historically high endemic nature of such institutions.
Committee members hope these new recommendations will help the United States reach its goal of a national hepatitis A case ratio of 0.3/100,000 people and a hepatitis A vaccination rate of 85%.
If these recommendations are approved by the director of the CDC and the U.S. Health Department, as they usually are, they will be published in the CDC’s Weekly Morbidity and Mortality Report.
Members of the committee reported no relevant financial disclosures.
ezimmerman@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @eaztweets
FROM ACIP MEETING