Dataset Information

Patients with Congenital Low-Flow Vascular Malformation Treated with Low Dose Sirolimus.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Patients with congenital vascular malformations often suffer from an impaired quality of life (QoL) because of pain and functional disabilities. Previous studies have shown that the mTOR inhibitor sirolimus can reduce complaints and improve QoL in some patients. High target levels of sirolimus of 10-15 ng/ml were well tolerated; however, in a relative high percentage of patients sirolimus caused serious adverse events (AEs).

Methods

A case series of 12 patients with therapy-resistant low-flow vascular malformations was treated with sirolimus, using low target levels of 4-10 ng/ml. Efficacy of sirolimus was evaluated in regard to pain symptoms using the visual analogue scale/numeric rating scale and patients reported QoL. To rule out a placebo effect of sirolimus, sirolimus was stopped after a certain time point and reintroduced as soon as complaints returned. Adverse events were closely monitored and graded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grading.

Results

An improvement in symptoms was seen in 92% (n = 11/12) of patients. In nine patients pain complaints returned. Seven out of nine of them (78%) again experienced a reduction of symptoms after restarting sirolimus treatment. Despite low target levels, these response rates are comparable to those found in the literature using higher target levels of sirolimus. However, significantly less serious AEs were observed with low dose sirolimus, suggesting low dose sirolimus might be safer. Unfortunately, young adolescent female patients developed serious menstrual disturbances during treatment with low dose sirolimus. We describe this adverse event for the first time in patients with congenital vascular malformations and this might be specifically related to low dose sirolimus.

Conclusions

Low dose sirolimus showed a high efficacy in patients with therapy-resistant and low-flow malformation, with a lower incidence of serious adverse events. At the same time a new adverse event, namely menstrual cycle disturbance, was observed in young adolescents, indicating the need for caution when sirolimus is given. This is extremely relevant to patients with low-flow vascular malformation, who are likely to require lifelong treatment for their condition.

SUBMITTER: Harbers VEM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8190005 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLymphangioleiomyomatosis is a rare disease caused by unregulated activation of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) signalling pathway. Sirolimus showed efficacy in a phase 3 trial of patients with lymphangioleiomyomatosis, but the optimal dose remains unclear.MethodsWe investigated the efficacy and safety of low-dose compared with conventional-dose sirolimus. Clinical data of 39 patients with lymphangioleiomyomatosis (mean age, 34.8 years; median treatment period, 29.6 months) who received sirolimus were retrospectively reviewed. Low-dose sirolimus was defined as any dose that maintained mean blood trough levels lower than those maintained with conventional doses (5-15 ng/mL).ResultsFifty-one percent of patients received low-dose therapy. The rate of decline in lung function decreased after treatment in the whole group (forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1], - 0.12 ± 0.47 [before] vs. 0.24 ± 0.48% predicted/month [after], p = 0.027; diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide [DLco], - 0.33 ± 0.61 vs. 0.03 ± 0.26% predicted/month, p = 0.006) compared with before treatment. In the low-dose group, the rate of decline in FEV1 (- 0.08 ± 0.38 [before] vs. 0.19 ± 0.51% predicted/month [after], p = 0.264) and DLco (-0.13 ± 0.62 vs. 0.02 ± 0.28% predicted/month, p = 0.679) showed a numeric trend towards improvement after treatment; however, the conventional-dose group showed significant improvement in FEV1 (- 0.26 ± 0.54 [before] vs. 0.22 ± 0.38 [after] % predicted/month, p = 0.024) and DLco (- 0.55 ± 0.58 vs. 0.04 ± 0.25% predicted/month, p = 0.002) after treatment. Adverse events (AEs) occurred in 89.7% of patients and the most common AEs was hypercholesterolaemia (43.6%), followed by stomatitis (35.9%). The occurrences of AE were similar between the low- and conventional-dose groups (85.0% vs. 94.7%, p = 0.605).ConclusionsLow-dose sirolimus may stabilise lung function decline in lymphangioleiomyomatosis patients, but its efficacy appears to be inferior to that of conventional-dose sirolimus.

Project description:BackgroundHIV-associated general immune activation is a strong predictor for HIV disease progression, suggesting that chronic immune activation may drive HIV pathogenesis. Consequently, immunomodulating agents may decelerate HIV disease progression.MethodsIn an observational study, we determined immune activation in HIV patients receiving low-dose (5 mg/day) prednisolone with or without highly-active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) compared to patients without prednisolone treatment. Lymphocyte activation was determined by flow cytometry detecting expression of CD38 on CD8(+) T cells. The monocyte activation markers sCD14 and LPS binding protein (LBP) as well as inflammation markers soluble urokinase plasminogen activated receptor (suPAR) and sCD40L were determined from plasma by ELISA.ResultsCD38-expression on CD8+ T lymphocytes was significantly lower in prednisolone-treated patients compared to untreated patients (median 55.40% [percentile range 48.76-67.70] versus 73.34% [65.21-78.92], p = 0.0011, Mann-Whitney test). Similarly, we detected lower levels of sCD14 (3.6 μg/ml [2.78-5.12] vs. 6.11 μg/ml [4.58-7.70]; p = 0.0048), LBP (2.18 ng/ml [1.59-2.87] vs. 3.45 ng/ml [1.84-5.03]; p = 0.0386), suPAR antigen (2.17 μg/ml [1.65-2.81] vs. 2.56 μg/ml [2.24-4.26]; p = 0.0351) and a trend towards lower levels of sCD40L (2.70 pg/ml [1.90-4.00] vs. 3.60 pg/ml [2.95-5.30]; p = 0.0782). Viral load in both groups was similar (0.8 × 105 ng/ml [0.2-42.4 × 105] vs. 1.1 × 105 [0.5-12.2 × 105]; p = 0.3806). No effects attributable to prednisolone were observed when patients receiving HAART in combination with prednisolone were compared to patients who received HAART alone.ConclusionsPatients treated with low-dose prednisolone display significantly lower general immune activation than untreated patients. Further longitudinal studies are required to assess whether treatment with low-dose prednisolone translates into differences in HIV disease progression.