PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 657 patients with EGFR-mutated (exon 19 deletions or L858R) locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC after disease progression on osimertinib were randomized 2 : 2 : 1 to receive amivantamab-lazertinib-chemotherapy, chemotherapy, or amivantamab-chemotherapy. The dual primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) of amivantamab-chemotherapy and amivantamab-lazertinib-chemotherapy versus chemotherapy. During the study, hematologic toxicities observed in the amivantamab-lazertinib-chemotherapy arm necessitated a regimen change to start lazertinib after carboplatin completion.
RESULTS: All baseline characteristics were well balanced across the three arms, including by history of brain metastases and prior brain radiation. PFS was significantly longer for amivantamab-chemotherapy and amivantamab-lazertinib-chemotherapy versus chemotherapy [hazard ratio (HR) for disease progression or death 0.48 and 0.44, respectively; P < 0.001 for both; median of 6.3 and 8.3 versus 4.2 months, respectively]. Consistent PFS results were seen by investigator assessment (HR for disease progression or death 0.41 and 0.38 for amivantamab-chemotherapy and amivantamab-lazertinib-chemotherapy, respectively; P < 0.001 for both; median of 8.2 and 8.3 versus 4.2 months, respectively). Objective response rate was significantly higher for amivantamab-chemotherapy and amivantamab-lazertinib-chemotherapy versus chemotherapy (64% and 63% versus 36%, respectively; P < 0.001 for both). Median intracranial PFS was 12.5 and 12.8 versus 8.3 months for amivantamab-chemotherapy and amivantamab-lazertinib-chemotherapy versus chemotherapy (HR for intracranial disease progression or death 0.55 and 0.58, respectively). Predominant adverse events (AEs) in the amivantamab-containing regimens were hematologic, EGFR-, and MET-related toxicities. Amivantamab-chemotherapy had lower rates of hematologic AEs than amivantamab-lazertinib-chemotherapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Amivantamab-chemotherapy and amivantamab-lazertinib-chemotherapy improved PFS and intracranial PFS versus chemotherapy in a population with limited options after disease progression on osimertinib. Longer follow-up is needed for the modified amivantamab-lazertinib-chemotherapy regimen.
METHOD: This cross-sectional study was conducted in 14 Perak state hospitals and 12 primary health clinics through an online survey. All ward pharmacists and trainee pharmacists with at least 1 month of ward pharmacy experience and working in government-funded health facilities were included. The validated survey tool consisted of demographic characteristics, pharmacists' experience towards challenges (22 items), and their attitude towards adaptive measures (9 items). Each item was measured based on a 5-point Likert scale. One-way ANOVA and logistic regression were employed to determine the association of pharmacists' characteristics against their experience and attitude.
RESULTS: Out of 175 respondents, 144 (81.8%) were female, and 84 (47.7%) were Chinese. Most pharmacists served in the medical ward (124, 70.5%). Commonly reported perceived challenges were difficulties in counselling medication devices (3.63 ± 1.06), difficulties in clerking medication history from family members (3.63 ± 0.99), contacting family members (3.46 ± 0.90), patient's digital illiteracy in virtual counselling (3.43 ± 1.11) and completeness of the electronic records (3.36 ± 0.99). For attitude towards adaptive measures, improving internet connection (4.62 ± 0.58), ensuring availability of multilingual counselling videos (4.45 ± 0.64), and provision of internet-enabled mobile devices (4.39 ± 0.76) were the most agreeable by the pharmacists. Male (AOR: 2.63, CI 1.12-6.16, p = 0.026) and master's degree holders (AOR: 2.79, CI 0.95-8.25, p = 0.063) had greater odds of high perceived challenging experience scores. Master's degree holders (AOR: 8.56, CI 1.741-42.069, p = 0.008) were also more likely to have a positive attitude score towards adaptive measures.
CONCLUSION: Pharmacists faced multiple challenges in the ward pharmacy practice during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially in medication history assessment and patient counselling. Pharmacists, especially those with higher levels of education and longer tenure, exhibited a higher level of agreement towards the adaptive measures. The positive attitudes of pharmacists towards various adaptive measures, such as improvement of internet infrastructure and digital health literacy among patients and family members, warrant immediate action plans from health authorities.
DESIGN/METHODS: This scoping review searched studies exploring the effectiveness of ACT approaches for individuals with ADHD across eight electronic databases (Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, ScienceDirect, PubMed, Emcare, Scopus, and Google Scholar). This review was based on a total of two quasi-experimental and four experimental studies.
RESULTS: A thematic analysis was suggested based on the PRISMA guidelines. Overall, the review presented preliminary evidence demonstrating the use of ACT among individuals with ADHD. It was found that the ACT was used to treat a variety of behavioural and psychosocial outcomes, which included reducing ADHD symptoms (e.g., impulsivity, inattention, inflexibility, etc.) and other sequelae related to the ADHD diagnosis such as poor quality of life, academic procrastination, depression and anxiety symptoms, and psychological maladjustment.
CONCLUSIONS: This review revealed that ACT was a flexible approach that could be adapted to deliver both targeted treatment of ADHD symptomatology and more general psychosocial issues. It could also be delivered in group or individual formats. Nevertheless, although the findings of the present scoping review indicate promising results, more research is needed.