New Biologic Drug Tackles Hard-to-Control Asthma

A new injectable drug reduces flare-ups in patients with severe asthma that is not controlled by steroid inhalers alone, two new trials show. The drug, benralizumab, is a biologic that works by killing white blood cells called eosinophils. These are present in large numbers in such patients, and they have been linked to severe asthma. If approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, benralizumab would join two similar drugs -- mepolizumab and reslizumab in fighting hard-to-control asthma. "We can offer patients who frequently require courses of oral corticosteroids and have a certain level of eosinophils a very effective treatment," said by lead researcher. With the right patient with the right characteristics, the level of asthma severity can be significantly modified. One potential advantage of benralizumab is that it can be given less often. The treatments that we have now are done every two weeks or once a month, but benralizumab can be given every two months, which may lower the cost. The available drugs cost about $25,000 to $30,000 a year and are covered by insurance, including Medicare, lead researcher added. The current drugs have been approved for patients aged 12 and older. If you have severe asthma and you're not getting the control that you need, ask your doctor about these medications. In the first trial, more than 1,300 patients aged 12 to 75 were randomly assigned to one of three groups: benralizumab given every four weeks; benralizumab given every eight weeks; or a placebo. In addition, the patients continued to use high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta agonist’s inhalers to control their asthma. Over 52 weeks, the researchers found that patients taking benralizumab had a 28 percent to 36 percent reduction in flare-ups, compared with a placebo. Patients on benralizumab also showed improved lung function. The most common side effects were cold-like symptoms in 20 percent of those receiving benralizumab, versus 21 percent of those on a placebo, and worsening asthma, 12 percent versus 15 percent, respectively. Among patients taking benralizumab, four suffered serious side effects. One patient had allergic granulomatous (inflammation of blood vessels), one patient had a panic attack and one had paresthesia (pins and needles). Among those receiving the placebo, one had a skin reaction at the site of the injection. Respiratory disease experts see this new drug as another breakthrough in treating hard-to-control asthma.

Return to top

    Prostate Cancer Treatments: Different Choices for Different Men  

A large, decade-long study offers new insights into the treatment dilemmas that many men diagnosed with prostate cancer. Researcher finds that for certain men, death rates from prostate cancer were roughly the same over several years regardless of whether they chose to be monitored called "watchful waiting" or underwent radiation or had their prostate removed. Men who were otherwise largely healthy and chose to be monitored were twice as likely as the others to see their cancer spread over the 10-year study period. "The healthier you are and the longer your life expectancy, the more risk you're taking with surveillance and the good news is that if you are in good health and seeking treatment, you don't have to worry about one (radiation vs. prostate removal) being inferior to the other" quoted by lead researcher. You can make your decision based on the potential side effects and what you're willing to accept -lead researcher added. Researcher randomly assigned more than 1,600 prostate cancer patients aged 50 to 69 to undergo one of three treatments: "active monitoring" (with an eye toward catching any sign of the cancer getting worse), radiation or removal of the prostate. Survival from localized prostate cancer was approximately 99 percent, irrespective of the treatment assigned. However, the cancer spread in 33 of the 545 men in the monitoring group compared to 13 of 553 in the surgery group and 16 of 545 in the radiation group. Patients and physicians now know from this study that there is no need to rush to make a decision about treatment if the patient has localized prostate cancer. There is a very good chance of survival 99 percent at a median of 10 years and this is the same for all the groups. This means there is time to consider and weigh the advantages and disadvantages of the different treatment strategies. 

SOURCE: HealthDay News, September 2016

Return to top

                                            FDA Cracks Down on Antibacterial Soaps

People should remain diligent about washing their hands with regular soap and water to avoid getting sick and prevent the spread of germs, especially during the start of the school year. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is banning most antibacterial soaps and body washes currently on store shelves, arguing that the products create potential health risks but don't perform any better than plain old soap and water. The ban covers soaps and body washes containing triclosan and triclocarban, the two most common antibacterial ingredients. Another 17 active ingredients also are included in the ban. Most consumer wash products labeled 'antibacterial' or 'antimicrobial' contain at least one of the antibacterial ingredients addressed in this final rule. There are more than 2,100 antibacterial soaps sold today, representing about 40 percent of the overall soap market, researcher said. Researcher also added that antibacterial soaps might be contributing to bacterial resistance. In the United States, at least 2 million people a year become infected with antibiotic-resistant bacteria, and at least 23,000 die from these infections, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The FDA also noted other health concerns related to long-term use of the now-banned active ingredients. Recent studies have shown that triclosan can affect the thyroid, estrogen and testosterone systems of mammals, which could have implications for human health. At the same time, manufacturers failed to show that their antibacterial products are any better than ordinary soap and water at preventing the spread of germs, the FDA said. The new ban does not cover hand sanitizer gels or wipes, which are not used with water and often contain alcohol as the active ingredient. It also does not cover antiseptics used in health care settings. The FDA estimates that this ban will reduce Americans' exposure to these active ingredients by 2.2 million pounds per year. Triclosan is most often included in liquid soap, while triclocarban is found in bar soaps. In terms of effectiveness the manufacturers had to prove to the FDA that antibacterial soaps worked better than plain soap and water at preventing the spread of germs or reducing infections. Antibacterial soaps containing benzalkonium chloride, benzethonium chloride and chloroxylenol will remain on the market while manufacturers develop additional safety and effectiveness data for these ingredients, researcher said.

Return to top