MATERIALS AND METHODS: Key efficacy endpoints were blinded independent review committee (BIRC)-assessed overall response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR) evaluated per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1. Other efficacy endpoints were investigator-assessed ORR and DOR; BIRC- and investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and disease control rate; overall survival (OS). Safety was evaluated by frequency and severity of adverse events.
RESULTS: At final data cutoff (6 March 2020), 198 treatment-naïve patients were included in efficacy analysis, of which 74 (37%) comprised the Asian subset; 450-mg fed (n=29), 600-mg fed (n=19), and 750-mg fasted (n=26). Baseline characteristics were mostly comparable across study arms. At baseline, more patients in 450-mg fed arm (44.8%) had brain metastases than in 750-mg fasted arm (26.9%). Per BIRC, patients in the 450-mg fed arm had a numerically higher ORR, 24-month DOR rate and 24-month PFS rate than the 750-mg fasted arm. The 36-month OS rate was 93.1% in 450-mg fed arm and 70.9% in 750-mg fasted arm. Any-grade GI toxicity occurred in 82.8% and 96.2% of patients in the 450-mg fed and 750-mg fasted arms, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Asian patients with ALK+ advanced/metastatic NSCLC treated with ceritinib 450-mg fed showed numerically higher efficacy and lower GI toxicity than 750-mg fasted patients.
METHODS: Thirteen hospitals in 7 countries used International Globe and Adnexal Trauma Epidemiology Study (IGATES) platform. Patients presenting between April 2009 and 2020 with OGI (with or without) adnexal involvement or intraocular foreign body (IOFB) were included.
RESULTS: Analyses of presenting and final VA, using "severe vision loss" (VA ≤ 6/60) and "no severe loss" (VA > 6/60), were performed. Four hundred fifty-four (64%) patients had VA p p p = 0.0001) of severe vision loss (SVL).
CONCLUSION: In OGIs from 13 hospitals, female gender, older age, zone III injury, eyelid injury, and IOFB were associated with higher risk of visual outcome of SVL.
METHODS: Demographics, diagnosis, comorbidities, disease activity, treatments and PROMIS instrument data were analysed. Primary outcomes were PROMIS Global Physical Health (GPH) and Global Mental Health (GMH) scores. Factors affecting GPH and GMH scores in IIMs were identified using multivariable regression analysis.
RESULTS: We analysed responses from 1582 IIM, 4700 non-IIM AIRD and 545 nrAID patients and 3675 controls gathered through 23 May 2022. The median GPH scores were the lowest in IIM and non-IIM AIRD patients {13 [interquartile range (IQR) 10-15] IIMs vs 13 [11-15] non-IIM AIRDs vs 15 [13-17] nrAIDs vs 17 [15-18] controls, P P
METHODS: The first and second COVAD patient self-reported e-surveys were circulated from March to December 2021, and February to June 2022 (ongoing). We collected data on demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 infection and vaccination history, reasons for hesitancy, and patient reported outcomes. Predictors of hesitancy were analysed using regression models in different groups.
RESULTS: We analysed data from 18 882 (COVAD-1) and 7666 (COVAD-2) respondents. Reassuringly, hesitancy decreased from 2021 (16.5%) to 2022 (5.1%) (OR: 0.26; 95% CI: 0.24, 0.30, P P P = 0.023) and HCs (OR: 4; 95% CI: 1.9, 8.1, P P = 0.001; IIMs vs HCs - OR: 5.4 95% CI: 3, 9.6, P
METHODS: A validated patient self-reporting e-survey was circulated by the COVAD study group to collect data on COVID-19 infection and vaccination in 2022. BIs were defined as COVID-19 occurring ≥14 days after 2 vaccine doses. We compared BIs characteristics and severity among IIMs, other autoimmune rheumatic and non-rheumatic diseases (AIRD, nrAID), and healthy controls (HC). Multivariable Cox regression models assessed the risk factors for BI, severe BI and hospitalisations among IIMs.
RESULTS: Among 9449 included response, BIs occurred in 1447 (15.3%) respondents, median age 44 years (IQR 21), 77.4% female, and 182 BIs (12.9%) occurred among 1406 IIMs. Multivariable Cox regression among IIMs showed age as a protective factor for BIs [Hazard Ratio (HR)=0.98, 95%CI = 0.97-0.99], hydroxychloroquine and sulfasalazine use were risk factors (HR = 1.81, 95%CI = 1.24-2.64, and HR = 3.79, 95%CI = 1.69-8.42, respectively). Glucocorticoid use was a risk factor for severe BI (HR = 3.61, 95%CI = 1.09-11.8). Non-White ethnicity (HR = 2.61, 95%CI = 1.03-6.59) was a risk factor for hospitalisation. Compared with other groups, patients with IIMs required more supplemental oxygen therapy (IIM = 6.0% vs AIRD = 1.8%, nrAID = 2.2%, and HC = 0.9%), intensive care unit admission (IIM = 2.2% vs AIRD = 0.6%, nrAID, and HC = 0%), advanced treatment with antiviral or monoclonal antibodies (IIM = 34.1% vs AIRD = 25.8%, nrAID = 14.6%, and HC = 12.8%), and had more hospitalisation (IIM = 7.7% vs AIRD = 4.6%, nrAID = 1.1%, and HC = 1.5%).
CONCLUSION: Patients with IIMs are susceptible to severe COVID-19 BI. Age and immunosuppressive treatments were related to the risk of BIs.
METHODS: The COVAD-1 and -2 global surveys were circulated in early 2021 and 2022, respectively, and we captured demographics, comorbidities, AIRDs details, COVID-19 infection history and vaccination details. Flares of IIMs were defined as (a) patient self-reported, (b) immunosuppression (IS) denoted, (c) clinical sign directed and (d) with >7.9-point minimal clinically significant improvement difference worsening of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) PROMISPF10a score. Risk factors of flares were analysed using regression models.
RESULTS: Of 15 165 total respondents, 1278 IIMs (age 63 years, 70.3% female, 80.8% Caucasians) and 3453 AIRDs were included. Flares of IIM were seen in 9.6%, 12.7%, 8.7% and 19.6% patients by definitions (a) to (d), respectively, with a median time to flare of 71.5 (10.7-235) days, similar to AIRDs. Patients with active IIMs pre-vaccination (OR 1.2; 95% CI 1.03, 1.6, P = 0.025) were prone to flares, while those receiving rituximab (OR 0.3; 95% CI 0.1, 0.7, P = 0.010) and AZA (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1, 0.8, P = 0.016) were at lower risk. Female gender and comorbidities predisposed to flares requiring changes in IS. Asthma (OR 1.62; 95% CI 1.05, 2.50, P = 0.028) and higher pain visual analogue score (OR 1.19; 95% CI 1.11, 1.27, P
METHODS: The COVAD surveys were used to extract data on flare demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 history, and vaccination details for patients with AIRDs. Flares following vaccination were identified as patient-reported (a), increased immunosuppression (b), clinical exacerbations (c) and worsening of PROMIS scores (d). We studied flare characteristics and used regression models to differentiate flares among various AIRDs.
RESULTS: Of 15 165 total responses, the incidence of flares in 3453 patients with AIRDs was 11.3%, 14.8%, 9.5% and 26.7% by definitions a-d, respectively. There was moderate agreement between patient-reported and immunosuppression-defined flares (K = 0.403, P = 0.022). Arthritis (61.6%) and fatigue (58.8%) were the most commonly reported symptoms. Self-reported flares were associated with higher comorbidities (P = 0.013), mental health disorders (MHDs) (P P P = 0.003), or a MHD (OR = 1.7; 95% CI: 1.1, 2.6; P = 0.007), or being a Moderna vaccine recipient (OR = 1.5; 95% CI: 1.09, 2.2; P = 0.014) were predictors of flares. Use of MMF (OR = 0.5; 95% CI: 0.3, 0.8; P = 0.009) and glucocorticoids (OR = 0.6; 95% CI: 0.5, 0.8; P = 0.003) were protective.A higher frequency of patients with AIRDs reported overall active disease post-vaccination compared with before vaccination (OR = 1.3; 95% CI: 1.1, 1.5; P
METHODS: Delayed-onset (>7 days) vaccine-related adverse events (AE), disease flares and AID-related treatment modifications were analysed upon diagnosis of AID vs healthy controls (HC) and the pregnancy/breastfeeding status at the time of at least one dose of vaccine.
RESULTS: Among the 9201 participants to the self-administered online survey, 6787 (73.8%) were women. Forty pregnant and 52 breastfeeding patients with AID were identified, of whom the majority had received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine (100% and 96.2%, respectively). AE were reported significantly more frequently in pregnant than in non-pregnant patients (overall AE 45% vs 26%, P = 0.01; minor AE 40% vs 25.9%, P = 0.03; major AE 17.5% vs 4.6%, P
DESIGN: Multi-national, multi-center collaborative network.
METHODS: The Research Standing Committee of the Asia-Pacific Academy of Ophthalmology and the Asia-Pacific Society of Eye Genetics fostered this research collaboration, which brings together renowned institutions and experts for inherited eye diseases in the Asia-Pacific region. The immediate priority of the network will be inherited retinal diseases (IRDs), where there is a lack of detailed characterization of these conditions and in the number of established registries.
RESULTS: The network comprises 55 members from 35 centers, spanning 12 countries and regions, including Australia, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Nepal, Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, and Thailand. The steering committee comprises ophthalmologists with experience in consortia for eye diseases in the Asia-Pacific region, leading ophthalmologists and vision scientists in the field of IRDs internationally, and ophthalmic geneticists.
CONCLUSIONS: The Asia Pacific Inherited Eye Disease (APIED) network aims to (1) improve genotyping capabilities and expertise to increase early and accurate genetic diagnosis of IRDs, (2) harmonise deep phenotyping practices and utilization of ontological terms, and (3) establish high-quality, multi-user, federated disease registries that will facilitate patient care, genetic counseling, and research of IRDs regionally and internationally.