-
Journal For Immunotherapy of Cancer Jun 2018Corticosteroids are routinely utilized to alleviate edema in patients with intracranial lesions and are first-line agents to combat immune-related adverse events (irAEs)...
BACKGROUND
Corticosteroids are routinely utilized to alleviate edema in patients with intracranial lesions and are first-line agents to combat immune-related adverse events (irAEs) that arise with immune checkpoint blockade treatment. However, it is not known if or when corticosteroids can be administered without abrogating the efforts of immunotherapy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of dexamethasone on lymphocyte activation and proliferation during checkpoint blockade to provide guidance for corticosteroid use while immunotherapy is being implemented as a cancer treatment.
METHODS
Lymphocyte proliferation, differentiation, and cytokine production were evaluated during dexamethasone exposure. Human T cells were stimulated through CD3 ligation and co-stimulated either directly by CD28 ligation or by providing CD80, a shared ligand for CD28 and CTLA-4. CTLA-4 signaling was inhibited by antibody blockade using ipilimumab which has been approved for the treatment of several solid tumors. The in vivo effects of dexamethasone during checkpoint blockade were evaluated using the GL261 syngeneic mouse intracranial model, and immune populations were profiled by flow cytometry.
RESULTS
Dexamethasone upregulated CTLA-4 mRNA and protein in CD4 and CD8 T cells and blocked CD28-mediated cell cycle entry and differentiation. Naïve T cells were most sensitive, leading to a decrease of the development of more differentiated subsets. Resistance to dexamethasone was conferred by blocking CTLA-4 or providing strong CD28 co-stimulation prior to dexamethasone exposure. CTLA-4 blockade increased IFNγ expression, but not IL-2, in stimulated human peripheral blood T cells exposed to dexamethasone. Finally, we found that CTLA-4 blockade partially rescued T cell numbers in mice bearing intracranial gliomas. CTLA-4 blockade was associated with increased IFNγ-producing tumor-infiltrating T cells and extended survival of dexamethasone-treated mice.
CONCLUSIONS
Dexamethasone-mediated T cell suppression diminishes naïve T cell proliferation and differentiation by attenuating the CD28 co-stimulatory pathway. However, CTLA-4, but not PD-1 blockade can partially prevent some of the inhibitory effects of dexamethasone on the immune response.
Topics: Animals; Dexamethasone; Disease Models, Animal; Female; Humans; Immunosuppression Therapy; Immunotherapy; Mice
PubMed: 29891009
DOI: 10.1186/s40425-018-0371-5 -
BMC Oral Health May 2022To compare the reported efficacy and costs of available interventions used for the management of oral lichen planus (OLP).
OBJECTIVE
To compare the reported efficacy and costs of available interventions used for the management of oral lichen planus (OLP).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed from database inception until March 2021 in MEDLINE via PubMed and the Cochrane library following PRISMA guidelines. Only randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing an active intervention with placebo or different active interventions for OLP management were considered.
RESULTS
Seventy (70) RCTs were included. The majority of evidence suggested efficacy of topical steroids (dexamethasone, clobetasol, fluocinonide, triamcinolone), topical calcineurin inhibitors (tacrolimus, pimecrolimus, cyclosporine), topical retinoids, intra-lesional triamcinolone, aloe-vera gel, photodynamic therapy, and low-level laser therapies for OLP management. Based on the estimated cost per month and evidence for efficacy and side-effects, topical steroids (fluocinonide > dexamethasone > clobetasol > triamcinolone) appear to be more cost-effective than topical calcineurin inhibitors (tacrolimus > pimecrolimus > cyclosporine) followed by intra-lesional triamcinolone.
CONCLUSION
Of common treatment regimens for OLP, topical steroids appear to be the most economical and efficacious option followed by topical calcineurin inhibitors. Large-scale multi-modality, prospective trials in which head-to-head comparisons interventions are compared are required to definitely assess the cost-effectiveness of OLP treatments.
Topics: Administration, Topical; Calcineurin Inhibitors; Clobetasol; Cyclosporins; Dexamethasone; Fluocinonide; Health Care Costs; Humans; Lichen Planus, Oral; Steroids; Tacrolimus; Treatment Outcome; Triamcinolone
PubMed: 35524296
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-022-02168-4 -
Neuropharmacology Dec 2020Zuranolone (SAGE-217) is a novel, synthetic, clinical stage neuroactive steroid GABA receptor positive allosteric modulator designed with the pharmacokinetic properties...
Zuranolone (SAGE-217) is a novel, synthetic, clinical stage neuroactive steroid GABA receptor positive allosteric modulator designed with the pharmacokinetic properties to support oral daily dosing. In vitro, zuranolone enhanced GABA receptor current at nine unique human recombinant receptor subtypes, including representative receptors for both synaptic (γ subunit-containing) and extrasynaptic (δ subunit-containing) configurations. At a representative synaptic subunit configuration, αβγ, zuranolone potentiated GABA currents synergistically with the benzodiazepine diazepam, consistent with the non-competitive activity and distinct binding sites of the two classes of compounds at synaptic receptors. In a brain slice preparation, zuranolone produced a sustained increase in GABA currents consistent with metabotropic trafficking of GABA receptors to the cell surface. In vivo, zuranolone exhibited potent activity, indicating its ability to modulate GABA receptors in the central nervous system after oral dosing by protecting against chemo-convulsant seizures in a mouse model and enhancing electroencephalogram β-frequency power in rats. Together, these data establish zuranolone as a potent and efficacious neuroactive steroid GABA receptor positive allosteric modulator with drug-like properties and CNS exposure in preclinical models. Recent clinical data support the therapeutic promise of neuroactive steroid GABA receptor positive modulators for treating mood disorders; brexanolone is the first therapeutic approved specifically for the treatment of postpartum depression. Zuranolone is currently under clinical investigation for the treatment of major depressive episodes in major depressive disorder, postpartum depression, and bipolar depression.
Topics: Animals; Anticonvulsants; Antidepressive Agents; Binding Sites; Brain; Diazepam; Drug Synergism; Electroencephalography; GABA Modulators; GABA-A Receptor Agonists; Hippocampus; Humans; Male; Mice; Pregnanes; Pyrazoles; Rats, Sprague-Dawley; Receptors, GABA; Seizures; Steroids; gamma-Aminobutyric Acid
PubMed: 32976892
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2020.108333 -
The European Respiratory Journal Apr 2023Dysregulated systemic inflammation is the primary driver of mortality in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. Current guidelines favour a 7-10-day... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Dysregulated systemic inflammation is the primary driver of mortality in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. Current guidelines favour a 7-10-day course of any glucocorticoid equivalent to dexamethasone 6 mg daily. A comparative randomised controlled trial (RCT) with a higher dose and a longer duration of intervention was lacking.
METHODS
We conducted a multicentre, open-label RCT to investigate methylprednisolone 80 mg as a continuous daily infusion for 8 days followed by slow tapering dexamethasone 6 mg once daily for up to 10 days in adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia requiring oxygen or noninvasive respiratory support. The primary outcome was reduction in 28-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were mechanical ventilation-free days at 28 days, need for intensive care unit (ICU) referral, length of hospitalisation, need for tracheostomy, and changes in C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, arterial oxygen tension/inspiratory oxygen fraction ( / ) ratio and World Health Organization Clinical Progression Scale at days 3, 7 and 14.
RESULTS
677 randomised patients were included. Findings are reported as methylprednisolone (n=337) dexamethasone (n=340). By day 28, there were no significant differences in mortality (35 (10.4%) 41 (12.1%); p=0.49) nor in median mechanical ventilation-free days (median (interquartile range (IQR)) 23 (14) 24 (16) days; p=0.49). ICU referral was necessary in 41 (12.2%) 45 (13.2%) (p=0.68) and tracheostomy in 8 (2.4%) 9 (2.6%) (p=0.82). Survivors in the methylprednisolone group required a longer median (IQR) hospitalisation (15 (11) 14 (11) days; p=0.005) and experienced an improvement in CRP levels, but not in / ratio, at days 7 and 14. There were no differences in disease progression at the prespecified time-points.
CONCLUSION
Prolonged, higher dose methylprednisolone did not reduce mortality at 28 days compared with conventional dexamethasone in COVID-19 pneumonia.
Topics: Adult; Humans; COVID-19; Methylprednisolone; SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19 Drug Treatment; Dexamethasone; Oxygen; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36356972
DOI: 10.1183/13993003.01514-2022 -
Kidney360 Feb 2023
Topics: Aldosterone; Sodium
PubMed: 36821603
DOI: 10.34067/KID.0000000000000058 -
Medical Archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and... Apr 2023Heart failure remains one of the most prevalent clinical syndromes associated with significant morbidity and mortality. According to current guidelines, the prescription... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
The Effectiveness of Eplerenone vs Spironolactone on Left Ventricular Systolic Function, Hospitalization and Cardiovascular Death in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure-HFrEF.
BACKGROUND
Heart failure remains one of the most prevalent clinical syndromes associated with significant morbidity and mortality. According to current guidelines, the prescription of a MRA is recommended to reduce the risk of HF hospitalization and death in all patients with symptomatic heart failure and no contraindications for this therapy.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of our study was to determine the efficacy of eplerenone vs. spironolactone on left ventricular systolic function by measuring left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients with chronic heart failure, especially their effect on preventing hospitalization, reducing mortality, and improving clinical status among patients with chronic HF.
METHODS
From June 2021 to June 2022, the study was a randomized, prospective clinical trial single blind study. A total of 142 patients of chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction were selected by random sampling. Each patient was randomly allocated into either of the two groups and was continued receiving treatment with either spironolactone (Spiron-HF group) or eplerenone (Epler-HF group). Patients in Epler-HF group were compared with an arm of the same size and matched by age and gender patients in Spiron-HF group for management of chronic HFrEF. Each patient was evaluated clinically, biochemically, and echocardiographically at the beginning of treatment (baseline) after 6 months and at the end of 12th month. Echocardiography was performed to find out change in left ventricular systolic function.
RESULTS
After 12 months of treatment, significant improvement of left ventricular ejection fraction was observed in eplerenone treated arm (37.9 ± 3.8 ± 4.6 in Spiron-HF group versus 40.1 ± 5.7 in Epler-HF group; P < 0.05). A significant reduction in left ventricular end-systolic volume (6.3 ± 2.5ml in Spiron-HF versus 17.8± 4.4ml in Epler-HF group; P < 0.05) and left ventricular systolic diameter volume (2.7 ± 0.5ml in Spiron-HF versus 6.7 ± 0.2ml in Epler-HF group; P < 0.05), occurred after 12 months of treatment. Left ventricular global longitudinal strain (LV GLS) was significantly improved in Epler-HF group compared with Spiron-HF group (0.6 ± 0.4 versus 3.4 ± 0.9; P < 0.05). There were no significant differences observed in reduction of left ventricular end-diastolic volume (2.2 ± 0.5 ml versus 4.7 ± 1.1ml; P =0.103) and left ventricular diastolic diameter (1.2 ± 0.6 versus 1.7 ± 0.3; P=0.082) in both arms. The effects of both MRA agents spironolactone and eplerenone on the primary composite outcome, each of the individual mortality and hospital admission outcomes are shown in Figure 1 and 2. Patients of the Epler-HF group showed statistically significant lower cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.53; 95% CI 0.34-0.82; p= 0.007) and all-cause mortality (HR 0.64; 95% CI 0.44-0.93; p= 0.022) than patients of the Spiron-HF group. The statistical analysis did not show a statistically significant difference between Epler -HF and Spiron-HF study groups regarding the risk of the primary composite outcome; cardiovascular death or hospitalization due to HF (Hazard Ratio (HR) eplerenone vs. spironolactone = 0.95; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.73- 1.27; p= 0.675).
CONCLUSION
Our study has demonstrated favorable effects of eplerenone on cardiac remodeling parameters and reduction of cardiovascular mortality and all-cause mortality compared with spironolactone in the treatment of HFrEF. The ability of eplerenone to effectively block the mineralocorticoid receptor while minimizing side effects and a significant reduction in the risk of hospitalization and cardiovascular death confirms its key role in the treatment of patients with chronic HFrEF.
Topics: Humans; Spironolactone; Eplerenone; Heart Failure; Stroke Volume; Prospective Studies; Single-Blind Method; Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists; Ventricular Function, Left; Chronic Disease; Hospitalization; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37260796
DOI: 10.5455/medarh.2023.77.105-111 -
Human Reproduction (Oxford, England) May 2017Is oral dydrogesterone 30 mg daily (10 mg three times daily [TID]) non-inferior to micronized vaginal progesterone (MVP) 600 mg daily (200 mg TID) for luteal support in... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
A Phase III randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy, safety and tolerability of oral dydrogesterone versus micronized vaginal progesterone for luteal support in in vitro fertilization.
STUDY QUESTION
Is oral dydrogesterone 30 mg daily (10 mg three times daily [TID]) non-inferior to micronized vaginal progesterone (MVP) 600 mg daily (200 mg TID) for luteal support in in vitro fertilization (IVF), assessed by the presence of fetal heartbeats determined by transvaginal ultrasound at 12 weeks of gestation?
SUMMARY ANSWER
Non-inferiority of oral dydrogesterone versus MVP was demonstrated at 12 weeks of gestation, with a difference in pregnancy rate and an associated confidence interval (CI) that were both within the non-inferiority margin.
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY
MVP is routinely used in most clinics for luteal support in IVF, but it is associated with side effects, such as vaginal irritation and discharge, as well as poor patient acceptance. Dydrogesterone may be an alternative treatment due to its patient-friendly oral administration.
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION
Lotus I was an international Phase III randomized controlled trial, performed across 38 sites, from August 2013 to March 2016. Subjects were premenopausal women (>18 to <42 years of age; body mass index (BMI) ≥18 to ≤30 kg/m2) with a documented history of infertility who were planning to undergo IVF. A centralized electronic system was used for randomization, and the study investigators, sponsor's study team, and subjects remained blinded throughout the study.
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS
In total, 1031 subjects were randomized to receive either oral dydrogesterone (n = 520) or MVP (n = 511). Luteal support was started on the day of oocyte retrieval and continued until 12 weeks of gestation (Week 10), if a positive pregnancy test was obtained at 2 weeks after embryo transfer.
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE
In the full analysis set (FAS), 497 and 477 subjects in the oral dydrogesterone and MVP groups, respectively, had an embryo transfer. Non-inferiority of oral dydrogesterone was demonstrated, with pregnancy rates at 12 weeks of gestation of 37.6% and 33.1% in the oral dydrogesterone and MVP treatment groups, respectively (difference 4.7%; 95% CI: -1.2-10.6%). Live birth rates of 34.6% (172 mothers with 213 newborns) and 29.8% (142 mothers with 158 newborns) were obtained in the dydrogesterone and MVP groups, respectively (difference 4.9%; 95% CI: -0.8-10.7%). Oral dydrogesterone was well tolerated and had a similar safety profile to MVP.
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION
The analysis of the results was powered to consider the clinical pregnancy rate, but the live birth rate may be of greater clinical interest. Conclusions relating to the differences between treatments in live birth rate, observed in this study, should therefore be made with caution.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS
Oral dydrogesterone may replace MVP as the standard of care for luteal phase support in IVF, owing to the oral route being more patient-friendly than intravaginal administration, as well as it being a well tolerated and efficacious treatment.
STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)
Sponsored and supported by Abbott Established Pharmaceuticals Division. H.T.'s institution has received grants from Merck, MSD, Goodlife, Cook, Roche, Besins, Ferring and Mithra (now Allergan) and H.T. has received consultancy fees from Finox, Ferring, Abbott, ObsEva and Ovascience. G.S. has nothing to disclose. E.K. is an employee of Abbott GmbH. G.G. has received investigator fees from Abbott during the conduct of the study; outside of this submitted work, G.G. has received personal fees and non-financial support from MSD, Ferring, Merck-Serono, Finox, TEVA, Glycotope, as well as personal fees from VitroLife, NMC Healthcare LLC, ReprodWissen LLC and ZIVA LLC.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
NCT01850030 (clinicaltrials.gov).
TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE
19 April 2013.
DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLLMENT
23 August 2013.
Topics: Administration, Intravaginal; Administration, Oral; Adult; Birth Rate; Dydrogesterone; Embryo Transfer; Female; Fertilization in Vitro; Humans; Luteal Phase; Ovulation Induction; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Pregnancy Rate; Progesterone; Sperm Injections, Intracytoplasmic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28333318
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dex023 -
Revista de Neurologia May 2022Catamenial pattern epilepsy is defined as an increase in the frequency of seizures during a specific stage of the menstrual cycle compared to baseline. It has been... (Review)
Review
Catamenial pattern epilepsy is defined as an increase in the frequency of seizures during a specific stage of the menstrual cycle compared to baseline. It has been described that around a third of women with epilepsy have a catamenial pattern. The changes in the seizure pattern would be explained by the influence of catamenial fluctuations, of female gonadal hormones on neuronal excitability. Progesterone through its metabolite allopregnanolone plays a protective role by increasing GABAergic transmission; however, its effect on brain progesterone receptors can increase neuronal excitability. The effects of estrogens are complex, they tend to increase neuronal excitability, although their effects depend on their concentration and exposure time. Three catamenial patterns of seizure exacerbation have been proposed: the perimenstrual pattern, the periovulatory pattern, and the luteal pattern. The diagnostic approach is carried out through a systematic process of 4 steps: a) clinical history of the pattern of the menstrual cycle and epileptic seizures; b) diagnostic methods to characterize the menstrual cycle and the pattern of seizures; c) check diagnostic criteria; and d) categorize the catamenial pattern. The treatment options studied require a higher level of evidence, and there is no specific treatment. Optimization of conventional antiseizure treatment is recommended as the first therapeutic option. Other therapeutic options, such as non-hormonal and hormonal treatments, could be useful in case the first therapeutic option proves to be ineffective.
Topics: Epilepsy, Reflex; Female; Humans; Menstrual Cycle; Pregnanolone; Progesterone; Seizures
PubMed: 35484702
DOI: 10.33588/rn.7409.2022041 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2015Sepsis occurs when an infection is complicated by organ failures as defined by a sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score of two or higher. Sepsis may be... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Sepsis occurs when an infection is complicated by organ failures as defined by a sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score of two or higher. Sepsis may be complicated by impaired corticosteroid metabolism. Giving corticosteroids may benefit patients. The original review was published in 2004 and was updated in 2010 and again in 2015.
OBJECTIVES
To examine the effects of corticosteroids on death at one month in patients with sepsis, and to examine whether dose and duration of corticosteroids influence patient response to this treatment.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 10), MEDLINE (October 2014), EMBASE (October 2014), Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS; October 2014) and reference lists of articles, and we contacted trial authors. The original searches were performed in August 2003 and in October 2009.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials of corticosteroids versus placebo or supportive treatment in patients with sepsis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
All review authors agreed on the eligibility of trials. One review author extracted data, which were checked by the other review authors, and by the primary author of the paper when possible. We obtained some missing data from trial authors. We assessed the methodological quality of trials.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified nine additional studies since the last update, for a total of 33 eligible trials (n = 4268 participants). Twenty-three of these 33 trials were at low risk of selection bias, 22 were at low risk of performance and detection bias, 27 were at low risk of attrition bias and 14 were at low risk of selective reporting.Corticosteroids reduced 28-day mortality (27 trials; n = 3176; risk ratio (RR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to 1.00; P value = 0.05, random-effects model). The quality of evidence for this outcome was downgraded from high to low for imprecision (upper limit of 95% CI = 1) and for inconsistency (significant heterogeneity across trial results). Heterogeneity was related in part to the dosing strategy. Treatment with a long course of low-dose corticosteroids significantly reduced 28-day mortality (22 trials; RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.97; P value = 0.01, fixed-effect model). The quality of evidence was downgraded from high to moderate for inconsistency (owing to non-significant effects shown by one large trial). Corticosteroids also reduced mortality rate in the intensive care unit (13 trials; RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.00; P value = 0.04, random-effects model) and at the hospital (17 trials; RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.98; P value = 0.03, random-effects model). Quality of the evidence for in-hospital mortality was downgraded from high to moderate for inconsistency and imprecision (upper limit of 95% CI for RR approaching 1). Corticosteroids increased the proportion of shock reversal by day seven (12 trials; RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.51; P value = 0.0001) and by day 28 (seven trials; n = 1013; RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.21; P value = 0.01) and reduced the SOFA score by day seven (eight trials; mean difference (MD) -1.53, 95% CI -2.04 to -1.03; P value < 0.00001, random-effects model) and survivors' length of stay in the intensive care unit (10 trials; MD -2.19, 95% CI -3.93 to -0.46; P value = 0.01, fixed-effect model) without inducing gastroduodenal bleeding (19 trials; RR 1.24, 95% CI 0. 92 to 1.67; P value = 0.15, fixed-effect model), superinfection (19 trials; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.20; P value = 0.81, fixed-effect model) or neuromuscular weakness (three trials; RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.88; P value = 0.40, fixed-effect model). Corticosteroid increased the risk of hyperglycaemia (13 trials; RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.37; P value < 0.00001, fixed-effect model) and hypernatraemia (three trials; RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.09; P value < 0.0001, fixed-effect model).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Overall, low-quality evidence indicates that corticosteroids reduce mortality among patients with sepsis. Moderate-quality evidence suggests that a long course of low-dose corticosteroids reduced 28-day mortality without inducing major complications and led to an increase in metabolic disorders.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Child; Critical Care; Dexamethasone; Fludrocortisone; Humans; Hydrocortisone; Methylprednisolone; Organ Dysfunction Scores; Prednisolone; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sepsis; Shock, Septic; Time Factors
PubMed: 26633262
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002243.pub3 -
Journal of Comparative Effectiveness... Dec 2021Compare efficacies of deflazacort and prednisone/prednisolone in providing clinically meaningful delays in loss of physical milestones in patients with nonsense... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Compare efficacies of deflazacort and prednisone/prednisolone in providing clinically meaningful delays in loss of physical milestones in patients with nonsense mutation Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Placebo data from Phase IIb (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00592553) and ACT DMD (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01826487) ataluren nonsense mutation Duchenne muscular dystrophy clinical trials were retrospectively combined in meta-analyses (intent-to-treat population; for change from baseline to week 48 in 6-min walk distance [6MWD] and timed function tests). Significant improvements in change in 6-min walk distance with deflazacort versus prednisone/prednisolone (least-squares mean difference 39.54 m [95% CI: 13.799, 65.286; p = 0.0026]). Significant and clinically meaningful improvements in 4-stair climb and 4-stair descend for deflazacort versus prednisone/prednisolone. Deflazacort provides clinically meaningful delays in loss of physical milestones over 48 weeks compared with prednisone/prednisolone for patients with nonsense mutation Duchenne muscular dystrophy.
Topics: Codon, Nonsense; Humans; Muscular Dystrophy, Duchenne; Prednisolone; Prednisone; Pregnenediones; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 34693725
DOI: 10.2217/cer-2021-0018