【24h】

Reply

机译:回复

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

We would like to thank Dr Panasoff1 for his comment on our report2 of the EXACT trial (NCT00096954) of omalizumab, which studied patients with atopic asthma with preserved pulmonary function who remained symptomatic on inhaled corticosteroids with or without other controller medications. To clarify, this study was done as a postmarketing commitment from the US Food and Drug Administration in which we were to evaluate patients with atopic asthma and normal lung function. Atopic asthma was not determined solely based on serum IgE levels; patients also had to have positive skin test responses or in vitro (RAST or ImmunoCAP) test responses to 1 relevant perennial aeroallergen, such as cat or house dust mite. The exclusion of prior use of systemic corticosteroids (oral or intravenous) was only if it had been in close proximity to the screening visit because this would indicate that the patient had a recent asthma exacerbation that could affect his or her lung function. The time restriction would also allow systemic steroids to have cleared from the patients' bodies so there would be no effect on baseline scores. Dr Panasoff was correct in noting that despite its proved efficacy in patients with allergic asthma, the study did not show a significant difference for omalizumab versus placebo in rate of exacerbations and that this might have been in part due to the patient population enrolled in the study. Reasons for poorly controlled asthma in the studied population might include poor compliance with therapy, improper use of inhaled medication, or chronic exposure to a potent antigen or the patients might be smokers. Omalizumab, by virtue of being administered every 2 or 4 weeks in the physician's office, might improve compliance. However, we believe that given the highly limiting patient eligibility for enrollment, the study was underpowered to demonstrate a statistically significant treatment effect in the primary end point. Because all patients in the study had positive results to allergen, we have not addressed Dr Panasoff's request to plot eosinophil levels against allergen-positive/allergen-negative status. We do appreciate his thorough review and the opportunity to provide a more in-depth explanation of the eligibility criteria and their effect on study outcome.
机译:我们要感谢Panasoff博士对我们的奥马珠单抗EXACT试验(NCT00096954)的报告2所做的评论,该试验研究了特应性哮喘并保留肺功能的哮喘患者,无论是否服用其他控制药物,其吸入皮质类固醇的症状仍然存在。为了明确起见,本研究是美国食品和药物管理局的上市后承诺,其中我们将评估特应性哮喘和肺功能正常的患者。过敏性哮喘并非仅根据血清IgE水平来确定。患者还必须对1种相关的常年性气敏原(例如猫或屋尘螨)产生积极的皮肤测试反应或体外(RAST或ImmunoCAP)测试反应。仅当全身使用皮质类固醇激素(口服或静脉内)时才排除在外,因为这表明患者近期有哮喘发作,可能影响他或她的肺功能。时间限制还将使全身类固醇从患者体内清除,因此不会对基线评分产生影响。 Panasoff博士是正确的,指出尽管已证明其对过敏性哮喘患者有效,但该研究并未显示奥马珠单抗与安慰剂的恶化率有显着差异,这可能部分是由于该研究的患者人群。在研究人群中哮喘控制不佳的原因可能包括对治疗的依从性差,吸入药物使用不当,长期暴露于强效抗原或患者可能是吸烟者。由于Omalizumab每2或4周在医师办公室服用一次,可能会改善依从性。但是,我们认为,由于患者的入学资格受到严格限制,因此该研究不足以证明主要终点具有统计学意义的治疗效果。由于研究中的所有患者对过敏原的阳性结果,因此我们并未满足Panasoff博士关于针对过敏原阳性/过敏原阴性状况绘制嗜酸性粒细胞水平的要求。我们非常感谢他的全面审查,以及有机会对资格标准及其对研究结果的影响提供更深入的解释。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号