Georgios Bakalos

A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials for comparing the effectiveness and safety profile of treatments with marketing authorization for relapsing multiple sclerosis.

The relative effectiveness and safety profile of the treatments with marketing authorization for relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS) are not well known because randomized controlled trials with head‐to‐head comparisons between these treatments do not exist. Thus, a network of multiple‐treatments meta‐analysis was performed using four clinical outcomes: ‘patients free of relapse’, ‘patients without disease progression’, ‘patients without MRI progression’ and ‘patients with adverse events’.

Variants of the MTHFR gene and susceptibility to acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children: A synthesis of genetic association studies

BACKGROUND Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is a complex disease with genetic background. The genetic association studies (GAS) that investigated the association between ALL and the MTHFR C677T and A1298C gene variants have produced contradictory or inconclusive results. MATERIALS AND METHODS In order to decrease the uncertainty of estimated genetic risk effects, a meticulous meta-analysis of published GAS related the variants in the MTFHR gene with susceptibility to ALL was conducted. The risk effects were estimated based on the odds ratio (OR) of the allele contrast and the generalized odds ratio (OR(G)). Cumulative and recursive cumulative meta-analyses were also performed. RESULTS The analysis showed marginal significant association for the C677T variant, overall [OR=0.91 (0.82-1.00) and OR(G)=0.89 (0.79-1.01)], and in Whites [OR=0.88 (0.77-0.99) and OR(G)=0.85 (0.73-0.99)]. The A1298C variant produced non-significant results. For both variants, the cumulative meta-analysis did not show a trend of association as evidence accumulates and the recursive cumulative meta-analysis indicated lack of sufficient evidence for denying or claiming an association. CONCLUSION The current evidence is not sufficient to draw definite conclusions regarding the association of MTHFR variants and development of ALL.

Evidence of association between methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase gene and susceptibility to breast cancer: a candidate-gene association study in a South-eastern European population.

The methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) gene has been proposed as a candidate gene for breast cancer (BC). However, the specific role of MTHFR polymorphisms and haplotypes has not been fully clarified and replicated. We examined the association of two common MTHFR polymorphisms (C677T and A1298C) and their haplotypes in a candidate-gene association study, involving 300 female patients with BC and 283 healthy women. The single locus analysis for the two polymorphisms revealed an association only for the C677T polymorphism [odds ratio (95% confidence interval), OR=2.05 (1.21-3.48)], but adjustment for age diminished this association [OR=1.76 (0.92-3.42)]. The menopausal status showed no significant effect in the association between the MTHFR polymorphisms and BC. The analysis of haplotypes showed an association for the C677-A1298 haplotypes (p=0.04). The available evidence from our study may support a contributory role of MTHFR polymorphisms in BC development. Future larger studies may help in elucidating the genetics of BC further.

On‐treatment prediction of sustained response to peginterferon alfa‐2a for HBeAg‐negative chronic hepatitis B patients

We assessed predictors of response in HBeAg‐negative chronic hepatitis B patients treated with peginterferon alfa‐2a in routine clinical practice.

Assessing the relative effectiveness and tolerability of treatments in small cell lung cancer: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND The combination of Cisplatin plus Etoposide (EP) is currently the standard treatment for small cell lung cancer (SCLC). However, a large number of alternative treatments (monotherapies and combinations) have been studied in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to identify more effective treatments. Aim of the present study was to assess the relative effectiveness and tolerability of these treatments. METHODS PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched to identify all RCTs that compared treatments for SCLC. Then, effectiveness of the treatments relative to the combination of Cisplatin plus Etoposide, reference treatment) was estimated by performing a network of treatments analysis. The analysis evaluated two efficacy outcomes (complete response - CR and objective response rate - ORR) and two tolerability outcomes (neutropenia and febrile neutropenia). All RCTs that provided data for calculating the odds ratios (OR) for the selected outcomes were considered. The network analysis involved direct and indirect analyses. RESULTS We identified 71 articles eligible for inclusion, involving 91 different treatments. In total, 16,026 patients were included in the analysis. In the direct analysis the combination of Cisplatin plus Cyclophosphamide plus Etoposide plus Epirubicin showed better response than EP for the ORR outcome, but with worse tolerability (presence of neutropenia). The indirect analysis revealed that the combination of Cisplatin plus Doxorubicin plus Etoposide (plus Vincrisitine) showed better response that EP for the ORR outcome. CONCLUSIONS No therapy shows better response for the two efficacy outcomes (CR and ORR); though, Cisplatin plus Doxorubicin plus Etoposide plus Vincrisitine might be a promising therapy for SCLC. The results should be interpreted with caution because the network was dominated by indirect comparisons. Large scale head-to-head RCTs are needed to confirm the present findings.

Efficacy and safety profile of boceprevir- or telaprevir-based triple therapy or dual peginterferon alfa-2a or alfa-2b plus ribavirin therapy in chronic hepatitis C: the real-world PegBase observational study.

Background The aim of the study was to determine the efficacy and safety of triple therapy with a first-generation protease inhibitor (PI; boceprevir, telaprevir) plus peginterferon alfa-2a or -2b plus ribavirin, and dual therapy (peginterferon alfa-2a or -2b plus ribavirin) in patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC) in routine clinical practice. Methods PegBase was an international, prospective, observational study in which 4441 patients with CHC were enrolled in 27 countries. This analysis focuses on results in 4100 treatment-naïve and previously treated patients treated with PI-based triple therapy or dual therapy, according to the discretion of the investigator and local standards of practice. The primary efficacy outcome was sustained virological response after 12-week follow up (SVR12). Results SVR12 rates in treatment-naïve genotype (G) 1 patients were 56.6% and 62.9% for recipients of boceprevir plus peginterferon alfa-2a/ribavirin and boceprevir plus peginterferon alfa-2b/ribavirin, respectively, and 65.3% and 58.6% for recipients of telaprevir plus peginterferon alfa-2a/ribavirin and telaprevir plus peginterferon alfa-2b/ribavirin, respectively. In previously treated patients assigned to these four regimens, SVR12 rates were 43.6%, 48.3%, 60.3% and 56.1%, respectively. Among treatment-naïve patients assigned to peginterferon alfa-2a/ribavirin and peginterferon alfa-2b/ribavirin, respectively, SVR12 rates were 49.2% and 41.9% in G1 patients, 75.7% and 83.3% in G2 patients, 65.9% and 65.9% in G3 patients, and 49.7%, and 51.1% in G4 patients. The safety and tolerability of dual and triple therapy were consistent with previous reports. Conclusion The efficacy and safety of first-generation PI-based triple-therapy and dual-therapy regimens in this real-world cohort were broadly comparable to those of previous studies.

A Predictive Model for Selecting Patients with HCV Genotype 3 Chronic Infection with a High Probability of Sustained Virological Response to Peginterferon Alfa-2a/Ribavirin

Background Access to direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) is restricted in some settings; thus, the European Association for the Study of the Liver recommends dual peginterferon/ribavirin (PegIFN/RBV) therapy wherever DAAs are unavailable. HCV genotype (GT) 3 infection is now the most difficult genotype to eradicate and PegIFN/RBV remains an effective option. The goal of this study was to devise a simple predictive score to identify GT3 patients with a high probability of achieving a sustained virologic response (SVR) with PegIFN alfa-2a/RBV therapy. Methods Relationships between baseline characteristics and SVR were explored by multiple logistic regression models and used to develop a simple scoring system to predict SVR using data from 1239 treatment-naive GT3 patients who received PegIFN alfa-2a/RBV for 24 weeks in two large observational cohort studies. Results The score was validated using a database of 473 patients. Scores were assigned for six factors as follows: age (years) (≤40: 2 points; >40 but ≤55: 1); bodyweight (kg) (<70: 2; ≥70 but <90: 1); no cirrhosis/transition to cirrhosis (2); ALT ≤2.5 x ULN (1); platelets (109/L) (>200: 2; ≥100 but <200: 1); HCV RNA (<400,000 IU/mL: 1). The points are summed to arrive at a score ranging from 0‒10 where higher scores indicate higher chances of SVR; 141, 123, 203, 249, 232, and 218 patients had total scores of 0‒4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9–10, respectively, among whom SVR rates were 45%, 62%, 72%, 76%, 84%, and 89%. Among 622 patients who had scores of 6‒10 and HCV RNA <50 IU/mL by treatment week 4 the SVR rate was 86% (532/622). Conclusions A simple baseline scoring system involving age, bodyweight, cirrhosis status, ALT level, platelet count and HCV RNA level can be used to identify treatment-naive Caucasian patients with HCV GT3 infection with a high probability of SVR with PegIFN alfa-2a/RBV therapy.

Monoclonal Antibody Biosimilars in Oncology: Critical Appraisal of Available Data on Switching

PURPOSE With the introduction of biosimilars of anticancer monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in oncology, physicians are potentially confronted with the question whether it is clinically adequate to switch patients who are clinically stable on treatment with the reference product to a newly available biosimilar (or vice versa/from 1 biosimilar to another). For a proper impact assessment of switching, robust, product-specific, and clinically relevant evidence should be required, ideally including data from appropriately designed switching studies. In this article, we assess the current body of switching data available for approved or proposed biosimilars of anticancer mAbs. METHODS PubMed was systematically searched and ClinicalTrials.gov and abstract databases of selected congresses were hand-searched to identify all switching studies including biosimilars of anticancer mAbs. FINDINGS We identified 8 switching studies with biosimilars of rituximab (CT-P10, GP2013, PF-05280586, and BCD-020) and trastuzumab (ABP 980). Two were performed in oncology indications and the other 6 in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Key elements of a well-designed switching study, such as randomization and blinding, were contained in several of the studies, but significant limitations were also present. The most frequent limitations were low statistical power because of small patient numbers, lack of an appropriate control arm, short follow-up, chosen outcome measures, and (for studies performed in RA) the concern whether switching data can be extrapolated to oncology indications. Accordingly, the data from these studies need to be interpreted with caution. Of note, all identified studies included a single switch only, whereas multiple switches may occur in the real-world setting. The scientific need to evaluate the impact of repeated switching has been recognized by the US Food and Drug Administration, who incorporated such a requirement in its draft guidance on interchangeability. IMPLICATIONS From the scarce data available, the consequences of switching between reference product mAbs and their biosimilar(s) in the oncology setting are as yet unknown. Additional clinical evidence from well-designed switching studies is needed to guide switching decisions.

Reply to ‘Biosimilars: a position paper of the European Society for Medical Oncology, with particular reference to oncology prescribers’

We welcome the position paper by the European Society for Medical Oncology on issues surrounding biosimilars.1 After recent approval of the first biosimilars of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in oncology, the input of medical oncology societies to an open discussion of medical opinion and provision of guidance regarding the introduction of these drugs into clinical practice are urgently needed. As pointed out by Tabernero et al , safety and efficacy of biosimilars are the shared responsibility of manufacturers and regulatory bodies. We agree that a robust regulatory framework for authorisation of biosimilars is in place in Europe, and properly developed and approved biosimilars can be considered a valid treatment option.2 In line with the authors and the whole pharmaceutical industry,3 we advocate that …

Comparative immunogenicity assessment of biosimilars

The first anticancer biosimilars have entered clinical use, with many others under clinical development. Like all biologics, biosimilars may elicit unwanted immune responses that can significantly impact clinical efficacy and safety. Head-to-head immunogenicity assessment of biosimilars and their reference biologics should, therefore, be a critical component of a biosimilars clinical development program. Various bioanalytical platforms may be used to detect and characterize immune responses, each having relative strengths and weaknesses. To fully recognize the clinical relevance of such data, regulators must be able to interpret immunogenicity results in an assay-specific context as well as in perspective of clinical pharmacology, efficacy and safety. Herein, we discuss current challenges imposed by global regulatory requirements for immunogenicity assessment of biosimilars.