Lake OB/GYN Associates of Mid-Florida

BackgroundCurrent treatment of vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC) is largely limited to azole therapy. Ibrexafungerp is a first-in-class triterpenoid antifungal with broad-spectrum anti-Candida fungicidal activity. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ibrexafungerp compared with placebo in patients with acute VVC.MethodsPatients were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive ibrexafungerp (300 mg twice for 1 day) or placebo. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with a clinical cure (complete resolution of vulvovaginal signs and symptoms [VSS] = 0) at test-of-cure (day 11 ± 3). Secondary endpoints included the percentage of patients with mycological eradication, overall success (clinical cure and mycological eradication), clinical improvement (VSS ≤ 1) at test-of-cure, and symptom resolution at follow-up (day 25 ± 4).ResultsPatients receiving ibrexafungerp had significantly higher rates of clinical cure (50.5% [95/188] vs 28.6% [28/98]; P = .001), mycological eradication (49.5% [93/188] vs 19.4% [19/98]; P < .001), and overall success (36.0% [64/178] vs 12.6% [12/95]; P < .001) compared with placebo. Symptom resolution was sustained and further increased with ibrexafungerp compared with placebo (59.6% [112/188] vs 44.9% [44/98]; P = .009) at follow-up. Post hoc analysis showed similar rates of clinical cure and clinical improvement at test-of-cure for Black patients (54.8% [40/73] and 63.4% [47/73], respectively) and patients with a body mass index >35 (54.5% [24/44] and 68.2% [30/44], respectively) compared with overall rates. Ibrexafungerp was well tolerated. Adverse events were primarily gastrointestinal and mild in severity.ConclusionsIbrexafungerp provides a promising safe and efficacious oral treatment that mechanistically differs from current azole treatment options for acute VVC.

This study aims to evaluate patient perceptions of subcutaneous denosumab or oral alendronate in postmenopausal women with or at risk for osteoporosis and how these perceptions influence adherence. Postmenopausal women with low bone mass were randomized to denosumab 60 mg every 6 months for 1 year (treatment period 1 [TP1]) followed by alendronate 70 mg once weekly for 1 year (treatment period 2 [TP2]), or vice versa. Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire data were collected at baseline and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months; a necessity-concerns differential (NCD) was calculated for each time point. Logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the influences of baseline characteristics on nonadherence. Participants included 250 women (alendronate/denosumab, n = 124; denosumab/alendronate, n = 126). During TP1, the NCD at month 6 was higher with denosumab than with alendronate (P = 0.0076). In TP2, the NCD was higher for women switched to denosumab than for women switched to alendronate at 6 months (P = 0.0126) and 12 months (P = 0.4605). Denosumab was preferred to alendronate regardless of treatment sequence (P < 0.0001). Covariate analysis revealed that higher TP2 baseline necessity scores were associated with lower odds of nonadherence (P = 0.0055), whereas higher concerns about medication scores were associated with higher odds of nonadherence (P = 0.0247). Higher NCD scores were also associated with lower odds of nonadherence (P = 0.0015). Participants preferred denosumab to alendronate while on treatment and had more positive perceptions of denosumab than alendronate. These perceptions were associated with better adherence.