Search

Background: Treatment of patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains challenging. In this setting the use of drug-coated balloons (DCB) represents an attractive approach to avoid adding another metal layer to the coronary wall., Aims: The Chansu Vascular Technologies (CVT)-ISR trial aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a novel everolimus-DCB (CVT-DCB) using a new coating formulation and crystalline everolimus., Methods: The CVT-ISR trial was a prospective, multicenter, open, single-arm, first-in-man (FIM) study. A total of 51 patients (mean age 69.2 years, 74.5% male) with single ISR coronary lesions (≤24 mm in length) were enrolled at nine sites in Europe., Results: The primary safety endpoint, freedom from target lesion failure (TLF) at 180 days, was 92.2%, with the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval (81.1%), above the protocol-defined objective performance criterion (OPC) (65% for conventional balloon angioplasty, P  < 0.05). At 1 year freedom from TLF was 90.2%. The primary efficacy endpoint, in-stent late lumen loss at 180 days (evaluated in a predefined subgroup of 25 patients scheduled for late angiography), was 0.40 mm (median 0.30 mm), lower than the protocol-defined OPC of the plain balloon angioplasty historical control (0.80 mm, P  < 0.001)., Conclusion: This FIM study demonstrated the superior efficacy of the new everolimus CVT-DCB compared with conventional balloon angioplasty in the treatment of patients with ISR., Clinical Trials Registration: NCT05731700., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Purpose: Combined mTORC1 inhibition with everolimus (EVE) and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase catalytic subunit p110α blockade with alpelisib (ALP) has demonstrated synergistic efficacy in preclinical models and supports testing the combination of ALP and EVE in the clinical setting. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD)/recommended dose for expansion (RDE) of ALP in combination with EVE and in combination with EVE and exemestane (EXE) and subsequently assess safety, preliminary efficacy and effect of ALP on the pharmacokinetics of EVE and determine the magnitude of the drug-drug interaction., Patients and Methods: Dose escalation phases were conducted in patients with advanced solid tumours and in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC). The dose expansion phase was conducted in patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumour and renal cell carcinoma (RCC) (both mechanistic target of rapamycin inhibitor [mTORi]-naive), in patients with mTORi-pretreated solid tumours and in postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- ABC., Results: During the doublet escalation phase, dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were reported in 5 of 10 (50%) patients: one patient had grade (Gr) 2 hyperglycemia and one patient had Gr 3 diarrhoea in the 300 mg dose group, one patient had Gr 2 hyperglycemia and one patient had Gr 4 hypocalcaemia in the 250 mg dose group, and one patient in the 200 mg dose group had Gr 3 diarrhoea and Gr 3 stomatitis. The combination of ALP 250 mg + EVE 2.5 mg was declared as the MTD/RDE in subjects with advanced solid tumours. In the triplet escalation phase, one patient who received ALP 200 mg + EVE 2.5 mg + EXE 25 mg had a DLT of Gr 3 acute kidney injury. This dose combination was declared as the MTD and RDE in subjects with advanced HR-positive HER2-negative BC. The common adverse events (≥30% patients), occurring across all phases, were hyperglycaemia, stomatitis, diarrhoea, nausea, asthenia, decreased appetite and fatigue. The sixteen-week progression-free survival rate was 52.4% (90% confidence interval [CI]: 32.8, 71.4) in the RCC cohort, 35.3% (90% CI: 16.6, 58.0) in the prior pNET cohort and 30.0% (90% CI: 8.7, 60.7) in the prior mTORi cohort. The pharmacokinetics of 2.5 mg of EVE was largely unchanged in the presence of ALP, independent of the dose (250 mg or 300 mg). There were no clinically relevant drug-drug interactions observed between ALP and EVE., Conclusion: The overall safety profile of ALP with EVE and EXE is manageable and reversible; no unexpected safety signals were noted compared with the individual safety profiles. Pharmacokinetics of ALP, EVE and EXE was largely unchanged in combination with each other., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement G.C. reports personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Lilly, personal fees from Seagen, personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Roche, personal fees from AstraZeneca and personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, outside the submitted work. M.M. reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, grants and personal fees from Roche, personal fees from Lilly, grants and personal fees from Puma, grants and personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Taiho Oncology, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from PharmaMar and personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, outside the submitted work. K.J. reports grants and personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, grants and personal fees from ADC Therapeutics, grants and personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, personal fees from Jounce Therapeutics, personal fees from Taiho Oncology, grants and personal fees from Genentech, personal fees from Synthon, personal fees from AbbVie, personal fees from Eisai, grants from Clovis Oncology, grants from AstraZeneca, grants from Novita Pharmaceuticals, grants from Debiopharm, grants from Lilly, grants from Zymeworks, grants from Immunomedics and grants from Puma Biotechnology, outside the submitted work. J.T.B. reports grants from AbbVie, grants from Alliance, grants from Amgen, grants from Ascentage Pharma Group, grants from AstraZeneca, grants from Bayer, grants from Boston Biomedical, grants from Bristol Myers Squibb, grants from Celgene, grants from Eli Lilly, grants from Genentech-Roche, grants from Hutchison, grants from Immunomedics, grants from Janssen, grants from MT Group, grants from Nektar, grants from Pfizer, grants from Polynoma, grants from Seattle Genetics, grants from EMD Serono, grants from Tesaro, grants from TG Therapeutics, grants from Biodesix and grants from Exact Sciences, during the conduct of the study. G.T. declared no conflict of interest. N.F. reports honoraria from Novartis, Ipsen, Merck, Sanofi-Aventis and Advanced Accelerator Applications; consulting or advisory role in Novartis/Ipsen, Advanced Accelerator Applications, Pfizer, Ipsen, Merck Serono, MSD Oncology and Wren Laboratories, Europe; research funding from Novartis (Inst), Merck Serono (Inst), Ipsen (Inst) and MSD (Inst) and other relationship with Springer and II Pensiero Scientifico Editore. M.M. and R.A.H. declared no conflict of interest. H.L. reports grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Novartis, personal fees and non-financial support from Ipsen and personal fees and non-financial support from Pfizer, during the conduct of the study. V.D. is a Novartis employee and declared no conflict of interest. O.A. is a Novartis employee and declared no conflict of interest. Z.L. is a Novartis employee and declared no conflict of interest. L.B. is a Novartis employee and declared no conflict of interest. F.A. reports grants from Novartis, during the conduct of the study, grants from Pfizer, grants from Roche, grants from Daiichi, grants from Eli Lilly and grants from Astra Zeneca, outside the submitted work., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Clinical care of rare and complex epilepsies is challenging, because evidence-based treatment guidelines are scarce, the experience of many physicians is limited, and interdisciplinary treatment of comorbidities is required. The pathomechanisms of rare epilepsies are, however, increasingly understood, which potentially fosters novel targeted therapies. The objectives of our survey were to obtain an overview of the clinical practice in European tertiary epilepsy centers treating patients with 5 arbitrarily selected rare epilepsies and to get an estimate of potentially available patients for future studies., Methods: Members of the European Reference Network for rare and complex epilepsies ( EpiCARE) were invited to participate in a web-based survey on clinical practice of patients with Dravet syndrome, tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC), autoimmune encephalitis, and progressive myoclonic epilepsies including Unverricht Lundborg and Unverricht-like diseases. A consensus-based questionnaire was generated for each disease., Results: Twenty-six of 30 invited epilepsy centers participated. Cohorts were present in most responding centers for TSC (87%), Dravet syndrome (85%), and autoimmune encephalitis (71%). Patients with TSC and Dravet syndrome represented the largest cohorts in these centers. The antiseizure drug treatments were rather consistent across the centers especially with regard to Dravet syndrome, infantile spasms in TSC, and Unverricht Lundborg / Unverricht-like disease. Available, widely used targeted therapies included everolimus in TSC and immunosuppressive therapies in autoimmune encephalitis. Screening for comorbidities was routinely done, but specific treatment protocols were lacking in most centers., Significance: The survey summarizes the current clinical practice for selected rare epilepsies in tertiary European epilepsy centers and demonstrates consistency as well as heterogeneity in the treatment, underscoring the need for controlled trials and recommendations. The survey also provides estimates for potential participants of clinical trials recruited via EpiCARE, emphasizing the great potential of Reference Networks for future studies to evaluate new targeted therapies and to identify novel biomarkers., Competing Interests: Sameer M Zuberi has conducted randomized controlled trials for GW Pharma and Zogenix Ltd in patients with Dravet syndrome. He has participated in advisory boards for Zogenix, GW Pharma, Biocodex, and Encoded Genomics. Katarzyna Kotulska was supported by the 7th Framework Programme of European Commission within the Large‐scale Integrating Project EPISTOP (Proposal No: 602 391‐2; Proposal title: “Long term, prospective study evaluating clinical and molecular biomarkers of epileptogenesis in a genetic model of epilepsy – tuberous sclerosis complex”; www.EPISTOP.eu) and the Polish Ministerial funds for science (years 2014‐2018) for the implementation of international co‐financed project and the grant EPIMARKER of the Polish National Center for Research and Development No STRATEGMED3/306306/4/2016. All other authors have no conflict of interest related to this survey to disclose. We confirm that we have read the Journal's position on issues involved in ethical publication and affirm that this report is consistent with those guidelines., (© 2020 The Authors. Epilepsia Open published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International League Against Epilepsy.)

Aim: To assess the efficacy and safety of everolimus in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who failed one or two anti-VEGF therapies., Patients and Methods: Data from four prospective, non-interventional studies conducted in Germany, France, Greece and Austria were pooled for this analysis. Patients with mRCC of any histology (clear cell or non-clear cell) were included. VEGF-refractory patients received everolimus 10mg/day until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective was to determine everolimus efficacy as measured by time to progression (TTP; from baseline to progression)., Results: The overall population comprised 632 patients; 493 patients received everolimus in the second-line setting. Most patients were of favourable/intermediate MSKCC risk (91%), had clear cell mRCC (89%), and had undergone nephrectomy (89%). Median TTP was 6.3months (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.9-6.8) for the overall population and 6.4months (95% CI, 5.8-6.9) for the second-line everolimus population. Similarly, median progression-free survival was 5.5months (95% CI, 5.0-6.1) for the overall population and 5.8months (95% CI, 5.0-6.4) for second-line everolimus population. Best tumour response (n=349) was complete or partial remission in 12% of patients and stable disease in 59% of patients. Overall population median overall survival (OS) was 11.2months (95% CI, 9.0-not reached). Commonly reported adverse events (AEs) (any grade) were stomatitis (25%), anaemia (15%) and asthenia (11%)., Conclusions: Results of this pooled analysis provide evidence of safety and effectiveness of second-line everolimus in routine clinical use and support everolimus as a standard of care for VEGF-refractory patients with mRCC., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Everolimus is a mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor. It gained approval based on the results of the RECORD-1 (Regulation of Coagulation in Orthopedic Surgery to Prevent Deep Venous Thrombosis and Pulmonary Embolism 1) trial, which included patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) whose disease progressed after receiving vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Bevacizumab is a monoclonal antibody targeting angiogenesis that is approved in patients with mRCC. The sequence of everolimus second-line therapy after failure of bevacizumab ± interferon (IFN) first-line therapy has not yet been studied., Methods: AVAstin(®) followed by afiniTOR(®) (AVATOR) was a noninterventional retrospective multicenter European observational study of 42 unselected patients with mRCC who were previously or currently treated with everolimus after failure of bevacizumab ± IFN. The primary end point was everolimus progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points were related to the overall survival (OS) of patients receiving the drug sequence and everolimus treatment and safety., Results: Exploring the duration of second-line everolimus treatment, 63.8% of patients received at least 3 months of everolimus and 28.8% received at least 8 months of treatment. At the time of data analysis, 15 patients (36%) were still receiving everolimus, 40% had stopped because of progressive disease, and 24% had discontinued treatment for other reasons. Patients receiving everolimus after bevacizumab experienced a median PFS of 17 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 5 [not reached]). Median OS was not reached with everolimus second-line therapy. At 32 months after the start of first-line therapy, 53.3% of patients were still alive. All grades of common adverse events (AEs) were consistent with the known safety profile of everolimus., Conclusion: The AVATOR-studied sequence displayed a longer than expected median PFS. Further prospective exploratory studies need to be performed to confirm these encouraging results in a larger cohort of patients., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Clinical data on the early and midterm outcomes of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) in routine clinical practice are limited. To fill this gap, we report on the early and midterm clinical outcomes of PCI with everolimus-eluting BVS from the large multicentre GHOST-EU registry., Methods and Results: Between November 2011 and January 2014, 1,189 patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with one or more BVS (Absorb BVS; Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA) at 10 European centres. The primary outcome of interest was target lesion failure (TLF), defined as the combination of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target lesion revascularisation (TLR). A total of 1,731 Absorb BVS were implanted at a mean of 12.3±3.4 atm. Technical success was achieved in 99.7% of cases. TLF was recorded in 67 of 1,189 patients at a median of 109 (interquartile range 8-227) days after implantation. The cumulative incidence of TLF was 2.2% at 30 days and 4.4% at six months. The annualised rate of TLF was 10.1%. At six months, the rate of cardiac death was 1.0%, target vessel myocardial infarction was 2.0%, TLR was 2.5%, and target vessel revascularisation was 4.0%. Diabetes mellitus was the only independent predictor of TLF (hazard ratio 2.41, 95% confidence interval: 1.28-4.53; p=0.006). The cumulative incidence of definite/probable scaffold thrombosis was 1.5% at 30 days and 2.1% at six months, with 16 of 23 cases occurring within 30 days., Conclusions: "Real-world" outcomes of BVS showed acceptable rates of TLF at six months, although the rates of early and midterm scaffold thrombosis, mostly clustered within 30 days, were not negligible.