Cargando…
Are there country-specific differences in the use of pegvisomant for acromegaly in clinical practice? An analysis from ACROSTUDY
OBJECTIVE: A comprehensive picture of pegvisomant use for treating acromegaly in routine clinical practice in different countries is lacking. We aimed, therefore, to document country-specific behaviors in real-life pegvisomant use, and the main safety and effectiveness outcomes in the ACROSTUDY. DES...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9270309/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35359232 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40618-022-01789-4 |
_version_ | 1784744435064504320 |
---|---|
author | Grottoli, S. Bianchi, A. Bogazzi, F. Bona, C. Carlsson, M. O. Colao, A. Dassie, F. Giampietro, A. Gomez, R. Granato, S. Maffei, P. Pivonello, R. Prencipe, N. Ragonese, M. Urbani, C. Cannavò, S. |
author_facet | Grottoli, S. Bianchi, A. Bogazzi, F. Bona, C. Carlsson, M. O. Colao, A. Dassie, F. Giampietro, A. Gomez, R. Granato, S. Maffei, P. Pivonello, R. Prencipe, N. Ragonese, M. Urbani, C. Cannavò, S. |
author_sort | Grottoli, S. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: A comprehensive picture of pegvisomant use for treating acromegaly in routine clinical practice in different countries is lacking. We aimed, therefore, to document country-specific behaviors in real-life pegvisomant use, and the main safety and effectiveness outcomes in the ACROSTUDY. DESIGN: ACROSTUDY is an open-label, non-interventional, post-marketing safety surveillance study. METHODS: A descriptive analysis was performed using data from the six top-recruiter ACROSTUDY countries, i.e., Germany (n = 548 patients), Italy (n = 466), France (n = 312), USA (n = 207), Spain (n = 200) and the Netherlands (n = 175). These nations accounted for > 85% of the ACROSTUDY cases. RESULTS: The mean pegvisomant dose at treatment start was lowest in the Netherlands (9.4 mg/day), whereas it ranged between 10.9 and 12.6 mg/day in the other countries. At year 5, the mean pegvisomant dose was around 15 mg/day in all countries, except France (18.1 mg/day). At starting pegvisomant, patients treated with monotherapy ranged between 15% in the Netherlands and 72% in Spain. Monotherapy remained lowest over time in the Netherlands. In all countries, the percentage of patients with normal IGF-1 increased steeply from < 20% at baseline to 43–58% at month 6 and 51–67% at year 1. After that, we observed minor changes in the rate of acromegaly control in all countries. The Netherlands peaked in disease control at year 2 (72%). The proportion of patients reporting changes in pituitary tumor size was generally low. Serious treatment-related adverse events were < 5% in all countries. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provided a detailed summary of real-life use of pegvisomant in the six top-recruiter ACROSTUDY nations. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9270309 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92703092022-07-10 Are there country-specific differences in the use of pegvisomant for acromegaly in clinical practice? An analysis from ACROSTUDY Grottoli, S. Bianchi, A. Bogazzi, F. Bona, C. Carlsson, M. O. Colao, A. Dassie, F. Giampietro, A. Gomez, R. Granato, S. Maffei, P. Pivonello, R. Prencipe, N. Ragonese, M. Urbani, C. Cannavò, S. J Endocrinol Invest Original Article OBJECTIVE: A comprehensive picture of pegvisomant use for treating acromegaly in routine clinical practice in different countries is lacking. We aimed, therefore, to document country-specific behaviors in real-life pegvisomant use, and the main safety and effectiveness outcomes in the ACROSTUDY. DESIGN: ACROSTUDY is an open-label, non-interventional, post-marketing safety surveillance study. METHODS: A descriptive analysis was performed using data from the six top-recruiter ACROSTUDY countries, i.e., Germany (n = 548 patients), Italy (n = 466), France (n = 312), USA (n = 207), Spain (n = 200) and the Netherlands (n = 175). These nations accounted for > 85% of the ACROSTUDY cases. RESULTS: The mean pegvisomant dose at treatment start was lowest in the Netherlands (9.4 mg/day), whereas it ranged between 10.9 and 12.6 mg/day in the other countries. At year 5, the mean pegvisomant dose was around 15 mg/day in all countries, except France (18.1 mg/day). At starting pegvisomant, patients treated with monotherapy ranged between 15% in the Netherlands and 72% in Spain. Monotherapy remained lowest over time in the Netherlands. In all countries, the percentage of patients with normal IGF-1 increased steeply from < 20% at baseline to 43–58% at month 6 and 51–67% at year 1. After that, we observed minor changes in the rate of acromegaly control in all countries. The Netherlands peaked in disease control at year 2 (72%). The proportion of patients reporting changes in pituitary tumor size was generally low. Serious treatment-related adverse events were < 5% in all countries. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provided a detailed summary of real-life use of pegvisomant in the six top-recruiter ACROSTUDY nations. Springer International Publishing 2022-03-31 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9270309/ /pubmed/35359232 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40618-022-01789-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2022, corrected publication 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Grottoli, S. Bianchi, A. Bogazzi, F. Bona, C. Carlsson, M. O. Colao, A. Dassie, F. Giampietro, A. Gomez, R. Granato, S. Maffei, P. Pivonello, R. Prencipe, N. Ragonese, M. Urbani, C. Cannavò, S. Are there country-specific differences in the use of pegvisomant for acromegaly in clinical practice? An analysis from ACROSTUDY |
title | Are there country-specific differences in the use of pegvisomant for acromegaly in clinical practice? An analysis from ACROSTUDY |
title_full | Are there country-specific differences in the use of pegvisomant for acromegaly in clinical practice? An analysis from ACROSTUDY |
title_fullStr | Are there country-specific differences in the use of pegvisomant for acromegaly in clinical practice? An analysis from ACROSTUDY |
title_full_unstemmed | Are there country-specific differences in the use of pegvisomant for acromegaly in clinical practice? An analysis from ACROSTUDY |
title_short | Are there country-specific differences in the use of pegvisomant for acromegaly in clinical practice? An analysis from ACROSTUDY |
title_sort | are there country-specific differences in the use of pegvisomant for acromegaly in clinical practice? an analysis from acrostudy |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9270309/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35359232 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40618-022-01789-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT grottolis aretherecountryspecificdifferencesintheuseofpegvisomantforacromegalyinclinicalpracticeananalysisfromacrostudy AT bianchia aretherecountryspecificdifferencesintheuseofpegvisomantforacromegalyinclinicalpracticeananalysisfromacrostudy AT bogazzif aretherecountryspecificdifferencesintheuseofpegvisomantforacromegalyinclinicalpracticeananalysisfromacrostudy AT bonac aretherecountryspecificdifferencesintheuseofpegvisomantforacromegalyinclinicalpracticeananalysisfromacrostudy AT carlssonmo aretherecountryspecificdifferencesintheuseofpegvisomantforacromegalyinclinicalpracticeananalysisfromacrostudy AT colaoa aretherecountryspecificdifferencesintheuseofpegvisomantforacromegalyinclinicalpracticeananalysisfromacrostudy AT dassief aretherecountryspecificdifferencesintheuseofpegvisomantforacromegalyinclinicalpracticeananalysisfromacrostudy AT giampietroa aretherecountryspecificdifferencesintheuseofpegvisomantforacromegalyinclinicalpracticeananalysisfromacrostudy AT gomezr aretherecountryspecificdifferencesintheuseofpegvisomantforacromegalyinclinicalpracticeananalysisfromacrostudy AT granatos aretherecountryspecificdifferencesintheuseofpegvisomantforacromegalyinclinicalpracticeananalysisfromacrostudy AT maffeip aretherecountryspecificdifferencesintheuseofpegvisomantforacromegalyinclinicalpracticeananalysisfromacrostudy AT pivonellor aretherecountryspecificdifferencesintheuseofpegvisomantforacromegalyinclinicalpracticeananalysisfromacrostudy AT prencipen aretherecountryspecificdifferencesintheuseofpegvisomantforacromegalyinclinicalpracticeananalysisfromacrostudy AT ragonesem aretherecountryspecificdifferencesintheuseofpegvisomantforacromegalyinclinicalpracticeananalysisfromacrostudy AT urbanic aretherecountryspecificdifferencesintheuseofpegvisomantforacromegalyinclinicalpracticeananalysisfromacrostudy AT cannavos aretherecountryspecificdifferencesintheuseofpegvisomantforacromegalyinclinicalpracticeananalysisfromacrostudy |