Search

BackgroundRituximab, an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, can cause infusion reactions (IRs), especially during the initial rituximab infusion therapy. Generally, patients are administered a histamine H1-receptor antagonist before the rituximab infusion, along with an antipyretic analgesic, to prevent or reduce IRs. Multiple retrospective case-control studies indicate that the second generation of histamine H1-receptor antagonists might be more effective than the first generation in suppressing IRs caused by the rituximab infusion. ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess the efficacy of first- and second-generation histamine H1-receptor antagonists for preventing IRs resulting from the initial infusion of rituximab in patients diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma. MethodsThis is a phase II, double-blind, active-controlled randomized trial. It will be a multicenter study conducted across 3 facilities that aims to enroll a total of 40 patients diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma who will receive their initial rituximab infusion. Participating patients will be administered hydroxyzine pamoate or bepotastine besilate, representing first- or second-generation histamine H1-receptor antagonists, respectively. This will be combined with 400-mg acetaminophen tablets taken approximately 30 minutes before the first infusion of rituximab. The primary end point of this trial is to assess severe IRs, equivalent to grade 2 or higher as defined by the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0, that occur within a 4-hour period after the initiation of rituximab infusion. The secondary end points include assessing the severity of the initial IR, the maximum severity of the IR, and the duration between rituximab infusion initiation and the onset of the first IR within a 4-hour period. Additionally, the trial will evaluate histamine H1-receptor antagonist–induced drowsiness using the visual analogue scale, with each patient providing their individual response. ResultsThis study began with patient recruitment in April 2023, with 17 participants enrolled as of November 12, 2023. The anticipated study completion is set for February 2026. ConclusionsThis study is the first randomized controlled trial comparing the effects of oral first- and second-generation histamine H1-receptor antagonists in preventing IRs induced by the initial administration of rituximab. The findings from this study hold the potential to establish the rationale for a phase III study aimed at determining the standard premedication protocol for rituximab infusion. Trial RegistrationJapan Registry of Clinical Trials jRCTs051220169; https://jrct.niph.go.jp/latest-detail/jRCTs051220169 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)DERR1-10.2196/54882

Abstract Background Optimised antithrombotic therapy requires clinical experience and an understanding of the current guidelines. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate whether pharmacist interviews and interventions with patients taking oral antithrombotic drugs in the pharmaceutical outpatient cardiology clinic had favourable clinical outcomes including decreased bleeding. Methods The participants included patients visiting the outpatient clinic of cardiovascular internal medicine at the Kobe University Hospital from January–December 2017, and were taking oral antithrombotic medication. The observation period was from the first visit to the outpatient clinic to October 2021 or death. Patients who received pharmacist intervention more than twice were defined as the pharmacist intervention group. Two control patients per one pharmacist intervention group individual were selected from the non-intervention pool matched for age, gender and antithrombotic medication type. Results Of the 895 eligible patients, 132 were in the pharmacist intervention group and 264 were selected for the matched non-intervention group. Bleeding events according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium criteria over type 2 were significantly lower in the pharmacist intervention group compared with the non-intervention group (17.4% versus 28.4%, P = 0.019). There were no significant differences in mortality and heart failure hospitalisation frequency, stroke, or cardiovascular events between the groups. Multivariate analysis identified age (≥ 65 years) and pharmacist intervention as factors associated with bleeding (odds ratio = 2.29 and 0.51, respectively). Conclusion Pharmacist intervention in the outpatient clinic of cardiovascular internal medicine was effective in reducing the risk of bleeding in patients undergoing antithrombotic therapy.

Oral lichen planus (OLP) is a type of chronic and refractory stomatitis characterized by abnormal keratinization, which is often painful. There is no consensus regarding treatment options for OLP, particularly in the presence of pain. The current study protocol focuses on the short-term efficacy and long-term safety of an ibuprofen gargle for pain management in patients with OLP. Patients (n = 24) with painful OLP will be enrolled. During a crossover study period, patients in the ibuprofen–placebo (IP) group will receive an ibuprofen gargle (0.6%) on day 1, a placebo gargle on day 2, and an ibuprofen gargle on days 3–5 at least once daily. Patients in the placebo–ibuprofen (PI) group will receive a placebo gargle on day 1, an ibuprofen gargle on day 2, and an ibuprofen gargle on days 3–5 at least once daily. The primary endpoint of the crossover study period is the change in pain level as measured by a visual analogue scale score from before gargle administration to 5 min after gargle administration on days 1 and 2. The primary endpoint of the long-term extension study is assessment of long-term safety. The results of this study may support existing evidence regarding the effectiveness of ibuprofen rinses in treating OLP.