DOCSLIB.ORG

A17-60 Guselkumab (Plaque Psoriasis) – Benefit Assessment According to §35A Social Code Book V1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A17-60 Guselkumab (Plaque Psoriasis) – Benefit Assessment According to §35A Social Code Book V1 IQWiG Reports – Commission No. A17-60 Guselkumab (plaque psoriasis) – Benefit assessment according to §35a Social Code Book V1 Extract 1 Translation of Sections 2.1 to 2.5 of the dossier assessment Guselkumab (Plaque-Psoriasis) – Nutzenbewertung gemäß § 35a SGB V (Version 1.0; Status: 27 February 2018). Please note: This translation is provided as a service by IQWiG to English-language readers. However, solely the German original text is absolutely authoritative and legally binding. Extract of dossier assessment A17-60 Version 1.0 Guselkumab (plaque psoriasis) 27 February 2018 Publishing details Publisher: Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care Topic: Guselkumab (plaque psoriasis) – Benefit assessment according to §35a Social Code Book V Commissioning agency: Federal Joint Committee Commission awarded on: 23 November 2017 Internal Commission No.: A17-60 Address of publisher: Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen Im Mediapark 8 50670 Köln Germany Phone: +49 221 35685-0 Fax: +49 221 35685-1 E-mail: [email protected] Internet: www.iqwig.de Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) - i - Extract of dossier assessment A17-60 Version 1.0 Guselkumab (plaque psoriasis) 27 February 2018 Medical and scientific advice: No advisor on medical and scientific questions was available for the present dossier assessment. IQWiG employees involved in the dossier assessment: . Virginia Seiffart . Gertrud Egger . Judith Gibbert . Charlotte Guddat . Ulrike Lampert . Sonja Schiller . Anke Schulz . Volker Vervölgyi . Natalia Wolfram Keywords: guselkumab, psoriasis, benefit assessment, NCT02951533, NCT02207231, NCT02207244 Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) - ii - Extract of dossier assessment A17-60 Version 1.0 Guselkumab (plaque psoriasis) 27 February 2018 Table of contents Page List of tables .............................................................................................................................. v List of figures .......................................................................................................................... vii List of abbreviations .............................................................................................................. viii 2 Benefit assessment ............................................................................................................. 1 2.1 Executive summary of the benefit assessment .......................................................... 1 2.2 Research question ..................................................................................................... 12 2.3 Research question A: adult patients who are candidates for systemic treatment .................................................................................................................... 13 2.3.1 Information retrieval and study pool .................................................................... 13 2.3.1.1 Studies included .............................................................................................. 13 2.3.1.2 Study characteristics ....................................................................................... 13 2.3.2 Results on added benefit ....................................................................................... 19 2.3.2.1 Outcomes included ......................................................................................... 19 2.3.2.2 Risk of bias ..................................................................................................... 21 2.3.2.3 Results ............................................................................................................. 22 2.3.2.4 Subgroups and other effect modifiers ............................................................. 28 2.3.3 Probability and extent of added benefit ................................................................ 29 2.3.3.1 Assessment of added benefit at outcome level ............................................... 29 2.3.3.2 Overall conclusion on added benefit .............................................................. 31 2.3.4 List of included studies ......................................................................................... 33 2.4 Research question B: adult patients with inadequate response to other systemic treatments or who are unsuitable for these treatments ......................... 34 2.4.1 Information retrieval and study pool .................................................................... 34 2.4.1.1 Studies included .............................................................................................. 34 2.4.1.2 Study characteristics ....................................................................................... 35 2.4.2 Results on added benefit ....................................................................................... 45 2.4.2.1 Outcomes included ......................................................................................... 45 2.4.2.2 Risk of bias ..................................................................................................... 47 2.4.2.3 Results ............................................................................................................. 50 2.4.2.4 Subgroups and other effect modifiers ............................................................. 62 2.4.3 Probability and extent of added benefit ................................................................ 63 2.4.3.1 Assessment of added benefit at outcome level ............................................... 63 2.4.3.2 Overall conclusion on added benefit .............................................................. 67 2.4.4 List of included studies ......................................................................................... 68 Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) - iii - Extract of dossier assessment A17-60 Version 1.0 Guselkumab (plaque psoriasis) 27 February 2018 2.5 Probability and extent of added benefit – summary .............................................. 71 References for English extract .............................................................................................. 72 Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) - iv - Extract of dossier assessment A17-60 Version 1.0 Guselkumab (plaque psoriasis) 27 February 2018 List of tables2 Page Table 2: Research questions of the benefit assessment of guselkumab ..................................... 1 Table 3: Guselkumab – probability and extent of added benefit ............................................. 11 Table 4: Research questions of the benefit assessment of guselkumab ................................... 12 Table 5: Study pool – RCT, direct comparison: guselkumab vs. fumaric acid esters (research question A) ............................................................................................................... 13 Table 6: Characteristics of the study included – RCT, direct comparison: guselkumab vs. fumaric acid esters (research question A) ................................................................................ 14 Table 7: Characteristics of the intervention – RCT, direct comparison: guselkumab vs. fumaric acid esters (research question A) ................................................................................ 15 Table 8: Characteristics of the study population – RCT, direct comparison: guselkumab vs. fumaric acid esters (research question A) ........................................................................... 17 Table 9: Risk of bias at study level – RCT, direct comparison: guselkumab vs. fumaric acid esters (research question A) .............................................................................................. 18 Table 10: Matrix of outcomes – RCT, direct comparison: guselkumab vs. fumaric acid esters (research question A) ..................................................................................................... 20 Table 11: Risk of bias at study and outcome level – RCT, direct comparison: guselkumab vs. fumaric acid esters (research question A) ........................................................................... 21 Table 12: Results (morbidity, health-related quality of life, side effects, time to event) – RCT: guselkumab vs. fumaric acid esters, week 24 (research question A) ............................. 23 Table 13: Results (mortality, side effects, dichotomous) – RCT: guselkumab vs. fumaric acid esters, week 24 (research question A) .............................................................................. 24 Table 14: Results (health-related quality of life, continuous) – RCT, direct comparison: guselkumab vs. fumaric acid esters, week 24 (research question A) ....................................... 25 Table 15: Extent of added benefit at outcome level: guselkumab vs. fumaric acid esters (research question A) ............................................................................................................... 30 Table 16: Positive and negative effects from the assessment of guselkumab in comparison with fumaric acid esters (research question A) ........................................................................ 32 Table 17: Study pool – RCT, direct comparison: guselkumab vs. adalimumab (research question B) ............................................................................................................................... 35 Table 18: Characteristics of the studies included – RCT, direct
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Report of the Advisory Group to Recommend Priorities for the IARC Monographs During 2020–2024
    IARC Monographs on the Identification of Carcinogenic Hazards to Humans Report of the Advisory Group to Recommend Priorities for the IARC Monographs during 2020–2024 Report of the Advisory Group to Recommend Priorities for the IARC Monographs during 2020–2024 CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1 Acetaldehyde (CAS No. 75-07-0) ................................................................................................. 3 Acrolein (CAS No. 107-02-8) ....................................................................................................... 4 Acrylamide (CAS No. 79-06-1) .................................................................................................... 5 Acrylonitrile (CAS No. 107-13-1) ................................................................................................ 6 Aflatoxins (CAS No. 1402-68-2) .................................................................................................. 8 Air pollutants and underlying mechanisms for breast cancer ....................................................... 9 Airborne gram-negative bacterial endotoxins ............................................................................. 10 Alachlor (chloroacetanilide herbicide) (CAS No. 15972-60-8) .................................................. 10 Aluminium (CAS No. 7429-90-5) .............................................................................................. 11
    [Show full text]
  • Phototoxicity of 7-Oxycoumarins with Keratinocytes in Culture T ⁎ Christophe Guillona, , Yi-Hua Janb, Diane E
    Bioorganic Chemistry 89 (2019) 103014 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Bioorganic Chemistry journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/bioorg Phototoxicity of 7-oxycoumarins with keratinocytes in culture T ⁎ Christophe Guillona, , Yi-Hua Janb, Diane E. Heckc, Thomas M. Marianob, Robert D. Rappa, Michele Jettera, Keith Kardosa, Marilyn Whittemored, Eric Akyeaa, Ivan Jabine, Jeffrey D. Laskinb, Ned D. Heindela a Department of Chemistry, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA 18015, USA b Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, Rutgers University School of Public Health, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA c Department of Environmental Science, New York Medical College, Valhalla, NY 10595, USA d Buckman Laboratories, 1256 N. McLean Blvd, Memphis, TN 38108, USA e Laboratoire de Chimie Organique, Université Libre de Bruxelles, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Seventy-one 7-oxycoumarins, 66 synthesized and 5 commercially sourced, were tested for their ability to inhibit 7-hydroxycoumarins growth in murine PAM212 keratinocytes. Forty-nine compounds from the library demonstrated light-induced 7-oxycoumarins lethality. None was toxic in the absence of UVA light. Structure-activity correlations indicate that the ability of Furocoumarins the compounds to inhibit cell growth was dependent not only on their physiochemical characteristics, but also Psoralens on their ability to absorb UVA light. Relative lipophilicity was an important factor as was electron density in the Methoxsalen pyrone ring. Coumarins with electron withdrawing moieties – cyano and fluoro at C – were considerably less 8-MOP 3 Phototoxicity active while those with bromines or iodine at that location displayed enhanced activity. Coumarins that were PAM212 keratinocytes found to inhibit keratinocyte growth were also tested for photo-induced DNA plasmid nicking.
    [Show full text]
  • Pharmacy and Poisons (Third and Fourth Schedule Amendment) Order 2017
    Q UO N T FA R U T A F E BERMUDA PHARMACY AND POISONS (THIRD AND FOURTH SCHEDULE AMENDMENT) ORDER 2017 BR 111 / 2017 The Minister responsible for health, in exercise of the power conferred by section 48A(1) of the Pharmacy and Poisons Act 1979, makes the following Order: Citation 1 This Order may be cited as the Pharmacy and Poisons (Third and Fourth Schedule Amendment) Order 2017. Repeals and replaces the Third and Fourth Schedule of the Pharmacy and Poisons Act 1979 2 The Third and Fourth Schedules to the Pharmacy and Poisons Act 1979 are repealed and replaced with— “THIRD SCHEDULE (Sections 25(6); 27(1))) DRUGS OBTAINABLE ONLY ON PRESCRIPTION EXCEPT WHERE SPECIFIED IN THE FOURTH SCHEDULE (PART I AND PART II) Note: The following annotations used in this Schedule have the following meanings: md (maximum dose) i.e. the maximum quantity of the substance contained in the amount of a medicinal product which is recommended to be taken or administered at any one time. 1 PHARMACY AND POISONS (THIRD AND FOURTH SCHEDULE AMENDMENT) ORDER 2017 mdd (maximum daily dose) i.e. the maximum quantity of the substance that is contained in the amount of a medicinal product which is recommended to be taken or administered in any period of 24 hours. mg milligram ms (maximum strength) i.e. either or, if so specified, both of the following: (a) the maximum quantity of the substance by weight or volume that is contained in the dosage unit of a medicinal product; or (b) the maximum percentage of the substance contained in a medicinal product calculated in terms of w/w, w/v, v/w, or v/v, as appropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • Supplementary Tables, Figures and Other Documents
    Clinical Relevance of a 16-Gene Pharmacogenetic Panel Test for Medication Management in a Cohort of 135 Patients David Niedrig1,2, Ali Rahmany1,3, Kai Heib4, Karl-Dietrich Hatz4, Katja Ludin5, Andrea M. Burden3, Markus Béchir6, Andreas Serra7, Stefan Russmann1,3,7,* 1 drugsafety.ch; Zurich, Switzerland 2 Hospital Pharmacy, Clinic Hirslanden Zurich; Zurich Switzerland 3 Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich (ETHZ); Zurich, Switzerland 4 INTLAB AG; Uetikon am See, Switzerland 5 Labor Risch, Molecular Genetics; Berne, Switzerland 6 Center for Internal Medicine, Clinic Hirslanden Aarau; Aarau, Switzerland 7 Institute of Internal Medicine and Nephrology, Clinic Hirslanden Zurich; Zurich, Switzerland * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +41 (0)44 221 1003 Supplementary Tables, Figures and Other Documents Figure S1: Example of credit-card sized pharmacogenomic profile issued to patients 1 Table S2: SNPs analyzed by the 16-gene panel test Gene Allele rs number ABCB1 Haplotypes 1236-2677- rs1045642 ABCB1 3435 rs1128503 ABCB1 rs2032582 COMT Haplotypes 6269-4633- rs4633 COMT 4818-4680 rs4680 COMT rs4818 COMT rs6269 CYP1A2 *1C rs2069514 CYP1A2 *1F rs762551 CYP1A2 *1K rs12720461 CYP1A2 *7 rs56107638 CYP1A2 *11 rs72547513 CYP2B6 *6 rs3745274 CYP2B6 *18 rs28399499 CYP2C19 *2 rs4244285 CYP2C19 *3 rs4986893 CYP2C19 *4 rs28399504 CYP2C19 *5 rs56337013 CYP2C19 *6 rs72552267 CYP2C19 *7 rs72558186 CYP2C19 *8 rs41291556 CYP2C19 *17 rs12248560 CYP2C9 *2 rs1799853 CYP2C9 *3 rs1057910 CYP2C9 *4 rs56165452 CYP2C9 *5 rs28371686 CYP2C9 *6 rs9332131 CYP2C9
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison of Two Diluents of 1% Methoxsalen in the Treatment of Vitiligo
    Net Letter eye care/cosmetic products should also be tested. Though anterior chamber after instillation of 10% phenylephrine phenylephrine is widely used by ophthalmologists in India hydrochloride solution. Br J Ophthalmol 1974;55:554-9. in nonhypertensive adults as a mydriatic agent to obtain 2. Wigger-Alberti W, Elsner P, Wuthrich B. Allergic contact maximum pupillary dilatation prior to fundus examination dermatitis to phenylephrine. Allergy 1998;53:217-8. 3. Yamamoto A, Harada S, Nakada T, Iijima M. Contact and assessment of refractory errors, allergic contact dermatitis to phenylephrine hydrochloride eyedrops. Clin dermatitis has not been reported from this country so far. Exp Dermatol 2004:29;200-1. This may be partly due to a low index of suspicion or failure 4. Herbst RA, Uter W, Pirker C, Geier J, Frosch PJ. Allergic and to perform patch tests in patients with transient and self- non-allergic periorbital dermatitis: Patch test results of the healing periorbital dermatitis. Information Network of the Department of Dermatology during a 5-year period. Contact Dermatitis 2004;51:13-9. RREFERENCESEFERENCES 5. Borch JE, Elmquist JS, Bindslevjensen C, Anderson KE. Phenylephrine and acute periorbital dermatitis. Contact 1. Agarwall Jl, Beveridge B. Liberation of iris pigment in the Dermatitis 2005;53:298-9. CComparisonomparison ofof twotwo ddiluentsiluents ooff 11%% mmethoxsalenethoxsalen inin thethe ttreatmentreatment ooff vvitiligoitiligo KKiraniran VV.. GGodseodse Consultant Dermatologist, Shree Skin Center and Laboratory, Mumbai, India AAddressddress fforor ccorrespondence:orrespondence: Dr. Kiran Godse, Shree Skin Center and Laboratory, 21/22, L market, Sector 8, Nerul, Navi Mumbai - 400 706, India. E-mail: [email protected] Sir, less than 20% of the body surface area.
    [Show full text]
  • Pharmaceuticals As Environmental Contaminants
    PharmaceuticalsPharmaceuticals asas EnvironmentalEnvironmental Contaminants:Contaminants: anan OverviewOverview ofof thethe ScienceScience Christian G. Daughton, Ph.D. Chief, Environmental Chemistry Branch Environmental Sciences Division National Exposure Research Laboratory Office of Research and Development Environmental Protection Agency Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 [email protected] Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Environmental Sciences Division, Las Vegas, Nevada Why and how do drugs contaminate the environment? What might it all mean? How do we prevent it? Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Environmental Sciences Division, Las Vegas, Nevada This talk presents only a cursory overview of some of the many science issues surrounding the topic of pharmaceuticals as environmental contaminants Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Environmental Sciences Division, Las Vegas, Nevada A Clarification We sometimes loosely (but incorrectly) refer to drugs, medicines, medications, or pharmaceuticals as being the substances that contaminant the environment. The actual environmental contaminants, however, are the active pharmaceutical ingredients – APIs. These terms are all often used interchangeably Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Environmental Sciences Division, Las Vegas, Nevada Office of Research and Development Available: http://www.epa.gov/nerlesd1/chemistry/pharma/image/drawing.pdfNational
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Coumarins: QSRT Approaches Regarding Their Genotoxicity
    Natural coumarins: QSRT approaches regarding their genotoxicity Estela Guardado Yordi,1,2* Maria João Matos,2 Lourdes Santana,2 Eugenio Uriarte2, Orlando Abreu1 and Enrique Molina Pérez2,3 1 Universidad de Camagüey “Ignacio Agramonte Loynaz”, Facultad de Química, Departamento de Ciencia y Tecnología de los alimentos, Camagüey – Cuba; [email protected] [email protected] 2 Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Facultad de Farmacia, Departamento de Química Orgánica, Santiago de Compostela – España; [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] 3 Universidad de Camagüey “Ignacio Agramonte Loynaz”, Facultad de Química, Departamento de Química, Camagüey – Cuba; [email protected] Abstract Coumarins are a group of phytochemicals with multiple applications in different fields, such as food and medicine. Many of their benefits are based on the different activities that they display, within which stand antioxidant properties. However, some conflicting evidences suggest the need to clarify or estimate the safety aspects and genotoxicity of this group of compounds. In this sense it has been shown in previous studies that some of them have presented pro-oxidant activity in vitro and clastogenic activity in silico. Therefore, in this paper chemical structures of natural coumarins that come from various natural sources were studied. This database became topological-structural information, using molecular descriptors from the TOPSMODE approach. A virtual screening was also held that used a model of structure-clastogenic activity relationship, and linear discriminant analysis (LDA) technique. The main results were interpreted in terms of safety. Introduction Nutrition, which was once intended to meet the nutrient needs, it is today directed to a research toward preventing and treating chronic diseases.
    [Show full text]
  • Particularly Hazardous Substances (Phs)
    PARTICULARLY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES (PHS) This list contains examples of chemicals that may be used at the University of Nebraska Medical Center (UNMC). The list is not all-inclusive. This lists contains examples of Particularly Hazardous Substances (PHS) which are a special subset of OSHA Hazardous Chemicals. PHS include chemicals that are known or suspect carcinogens, reproductive toxins, and/or highly toxic materials. Before working with any PHS, please determine if you have any of these and evaluate if additional protective work practices are needed. You should utilize the PHS Assessment Form to help in this evaluation. Abbreviations Used in List Headings CARC NTP National Toxicology Program listed carcinogen - National Toxicology Program K = known carcinogen S = suspect carcinogen CARC IARC International Association for Research on Cancer listed carcinogen - IARC 1= known human carcinogen 2A = probable human carcinogen 2B = possible human carcinogen CARC OSHA OSHA regulated carcinogen - OSHA-regulated carcinogens X = regulated carcinogen REPRO SHEP Included in Catalog of Teratogenic Agents, T.H. Shepard, 6th Edition, Johns Hopkins Press, 1989 X = listed teratogen REPRO CALIF Listed by the State of California ‘Safe Drinking Water Act, 1986’ http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/prop65_list/Newlist.html F = female reproductive hazard M = male reproductive hazard HTX Highly toxic, included in EPA’s list ‘Acutely Toxic Hazardous Waste’, P-listed waste 40 CFR 261.33, or Included in OSHA’s list of highly hazardous chemicals with a threshold £200
    [Show full text]
  • Analytical Methods for the Determination of Anti-Psoriatic Drugs - a Review
    Acta Scientific Pharmaceutical Sciences (ISSN: 2581-5423) Volume 4 Issue 2 February 2020 Review Article Analytical Methods for the Determination of Anti-Psoriatic Drugs - A Review Sistla Mounica Pratyusha* and Choppala Asha Deepti Department of Pharmaceutical Analysis and Quality Assurance, GITAM Institute Received: January 20, 2020 of Pharmacy, GITAM (Deemed to be) University, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, Published: January 31, 2020 India © All rights are reserved by Sistla Mounica *Corresponding Author: Sistla Mounica Pratyusha, Department of Pharma- Pratyusha and Choppala Asha Deepti. ceutical Analysis and Quality Assurance, GITAM Institute of Pharmacy, GITAM (Deemed to be) University, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India. DOI: 10.31080/ASPS.2020.04.0490 Abstract Psoriasis is a long-lasting autoimmune disease characterized by patches of abnormal skin. Typical psoriatic scales are in thick, red patches. Sometimes, these patches will crack and bleed. Psoriasis is the result of a sped-up skin production process. Some of the drugs used in the treatment of psoriasis are Acitretin, Etretinate, Bergapten, Methoxsalen, Tazarotene, Calcipotriol, Anthralin etc. A brief review of the analytical methods developed for the determination of drugs used for the treatment of Psoriasis was discussed in the present study. Keywords: Acitretin; Etretinate; Bergapten Introduction Psoriasis is a chronic autoimmune condition that causes the rapid build-up of skin cells. This build-up of cells causes scaling on the skin’s surface. Typically, skin cells grow deep in the skin and slowly rise to the surface. The typical life cycle of a skin cell is one month. Some of the drugs used in the treatment of psoriasis: Acitretin, Etretinate, Bergapten, Methoxsalen, Tazarotene, Calci- potriol, Anthralin and the chemical structures of these drugs were - termination of these drugs were summarized in table 1.
    [Show full text]
  • FDA Listing of Established Pharmacologic Class Text Phrases January 2021
    FDA Listing of Established Pharmacologic Class Text Phrases January 2021 FDA EPC Text Phrase PLR regulations require that the following statement is included in the Highlights Indications and Usage heading if a drug is a member of an EPC [see 21 CFR 201.57(a)(6)]: “(Drug) is a (FDA EPC Text Phrase) indicated for Active Moiety Name [indication(s)].” For each listed active moiety, the associated FDA EPC text phrase is included in this document. For more information about how FDA determines the EPC Text Phrase, see the 2009 "Determining EPC for Use in the Highlights" guidance and 2013 "Determining EPC for Use in the Highlights" MAPP 7400.13.
    [Show full text]
  • The Psoralens Adversely Affect Reproductive Function in Male Wistar Rats
    Reproductive Toxicology 15 (2001) 137–144 www.elsevier.com/locate/reprotox The psoralens adversely affect reproductive function in male wistar rats Moussa M. Diawaraa,*, Kathryn J. Chavezb, Doug Simplemana, David E. Williamsc, Michael R. Franklind, Patricia B. Hoyere aDepartment of Biology, University of Southern Colorado, Pueblo, CO 81001, USA bDepartment of Comparative Environmental Toxicology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA cDepartment of Environmental and Molecular Toxicology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA dDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA eDepartment of Physiology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AR 85721, USA Received 3 October 2000; received in revised form 3 November 2000; accepted 23 December 2000 This research was supported, in part, by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIH/NIEHS) grant ES00288 (to MMD), grant ADCRC #9808 (to PBH), and The University of Southern Colorado’s Faculty Scholarly Activity Grant. Abstract The psoralens occur naturally in produce and are widely used in skin therapy. Studies show that 5-methoxypsoralen and 8-methoxy- psoralen reduced birth rates in rats. We determined the effect of psoralens on reproductive function in male rats. Male Wistar rats were dosed daily with 5-methoxypsoralen or 8-methoxypsoralen (75 or 150 mg/kg, p.o.), or vehicle control. Treated males had significantly smaller pituitary glands, fewer sperm per ejaculate, and fewer sperm in the vasa defferentia and epididymides than controls. Dosing significantly elevated levels of testosterone and increased relative testis weight, but did not directly affect testicular weight. Females bred to dosed males required more time to become pregnant, and these males required more breeding attempts.
    [Show full text]
  • Phototherapy, Photochemotherapy, and Excimer Laser Therapy for Dermatologic Conditions
    Medical Coverage Policy Effective Date ............................................. 9/15/2021 Next Review Date ....................................... 9/15/2022 Coverage Policy Number .................................. 0031 Phototherapy, Photochemotherapy, and Excimer Laser Therapy for Dermatologic Conditions Table of Contents Related Coverage Resources Overview .............................................................. 1 Extracorporeal Photopheresis Coverage Policy ................................................... 1 General Background ............................................ 4 Medicare Coverage Determinations .................. 17 Coding/Billing Information .................................. 17 References ........................................................ 18 INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE The following Coverage Policy applies to health benefit plans administered by Cigna Companies. Certain Cigna Companies and/or lines of business only provide utilization review services to clients and do not make coverage determinations. References to standard benefit plan language and coverage determinations do not apply to those clients. Coverage Policies are intended to provide guidance in interpreting certain standard benefit plans administered by Cigna Companies. Please note, the terms of a customer’s particular benefit plan document [Group Service Agreement, Evidence of Coverage, Certificate of Coverage, Summary Plan Description (SPD) or similar plan document] may differ significantly from the standard benefit plans upon which these Coverage
    [Show full text]