Randomized Trial of Verubecestat for Prodromal Alzheimer’s Disease

BackgroundAlzheimer’s disease is characterized by the deposition of amyloid-beta (Aβ) plaques in the brain. Aβ is produced from the sequential cleavage of amyloid precursor protein by β-site amyloid precursor protein–cleaving enzyme 1 (BACE-1) followed by γ-secretase. Verubecestat is an oral BACE-1 inhibitor that reduces the Aβ level in the cerebrospinal fluid of patients with Alzheimer’s disease.MethodsWe conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 78-week trial to evaluate verubecestat at doses of 12 mg and 40 mg per day, as compared with placebo, in patients who had a clinical diagnosis of mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease. The coprimary outcomes were the change from baseline to week 78 in the score on the cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-cog; scores range from 0 to 70, with higher scores indicating worse dementia) and in the score on the Alzheimer’s Disease Cooperative Study Activities of Daily Living Inventory scale (ADCS-ADL; scores range from 0 to 78, with lower scores indicating worse function).ResultsA total of 1958 patients underwent randomization; 653 were randomly assigned to receive verubecestat at a dose of 12 mg per day (the 12-mg group), 652 to receive verubecestat at a dose of 40 mg per day (the 40-mg group), and 653 to receive matching placebo. The trial was terminated early for futility 50 months after onset, which was within 5 months before its scheduled completion, and after enrollment of the planned 1958 patients was complete. The estimated mean change from baseline to week 78 in the ADAS-cog score was 7.9 in the 12-mg group, 8.0 in the 40-mg group, and 7.7 in the placebo group (P=0.63 for the comparison between the 12-mg group and the placebo group and P=0.46 for the comparison between the 40-mg group and the placebo group). The estimated mean change from baseline to week 78 in the ADCS-ADL score was −8.4 in the 12-mg group, −8.2 in the 40-mg group, and −8.9 in the placebo group (P=0.49 for the comparison between the 12-mg group and the placebo group and P=0.32 for the comparison between the 40-mg group and the placebo group). Adverse events, including rash, falls and injuries, sleep disturbance, suicidal ideation, weight loss, and hair-color change, were more common in the verubecestat groups than in the placebo group.ConclusionsVerubecestat did not reduce cognitive or functional decline in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease and was associated with treatment-related adverse events. (Funded by Merck; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01739348.)

Aerosol pentamidine prophylaxis following Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia in AIDS patients: Results of a blinded dose-comparison study using an ultrasonic nebulizer

Do Therapeutic Bile Acids Hit the Sweet Spot of Glucose Metabolism in NAFLD?

BackgroundPatients with bronchiectasis have frequent exacerbations that are thought to be related to neutrophilic inflammation. The activity and quantity of neutrophil serine proteases, including neutrophil elastase, are increased in the sputum of patients with bronchiectasis at baseline and increase further during exacerbations. Brensocatib (INS1007) is an oral reversible inhibitor of dipeptidyl peptidase 1 (DPP-1), an enzyme responsible for the activation of neutrophil serine proteases.MethodsIn a phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, patients with bronchiectasis who had had at least two exacerbations in the previous year to receive placebo, 10 mg of brensocatib, or 25 mg of brensocatib once daily for 24 weeks. The time to the first exacerbation (primary end point), the rate of exacerbations (secondary end point), sputum neutrophil elastase activity, and safety were assessed.ResultsOf 256 patients, 87 were assigned to receive placebo, 82 to receive 10 mg of brensocatib, and 87 to receive 25 mg of brensocatib. The 25th percentile of the time to the first exacerbation was 67 days in the placebo group, 134 days in the 10-mg brensocatib group, and 96 days in the 25-mg brensocatib group. Brensocatib treatment prolonged the time to the first exacerbation as compared with placebo (P=0.03 for 10-mg brensocatib vs. placebo; P=0.04 for 25-mg brensocatib vs. placebo). The adjusted hazard ratio for exacerbation in the comparison of brensocatib with placebo was 0.58 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35 to 0.95) in the 10-mg group (P=0.03) and 0.62 (95% CI, 0.38 to 0.99) in the 25-mg group (P=0.046). The incidence-rate ratio was 0.64 (95% CI, 0.42 to 0.98) in the 10-mg group, as compared with placebo (P=0.04), and 0.75 (95% CI, 0.50 to 1.13) in the 25-mg group, as compared with placebo (P=0.17). With both brensocatib doses, sputum neutrophil elastase activity was reduced from baseline over the 24-week treatment period. The incidence of dental and skin adverse events of special interest was higher with the 10-mg and 25-mg brensocatib doses, respectively, than with placebo.ConclusionsIn this 24-week trial, reduction of neutrophil serine protease activity with brensocatib in patients with bronchiectasis was associated with improvements in bronchiectasis clinical outcomes. (Funded by Insmed; WILLOW ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03218917.)

Aerosol pentamidine prophylaxis following pneumocystis carinii pneumonia in AIDS patients: Results of a blinded dose-comparison study using an ultrasonic nebulizer

Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study of a cytomegalovirus-specific monoclonal antibody (MSL-109) for prevention of cytomegalovirus infection after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

Prurigo nodularis (PN), a chronic inflammatory skin condition, adversely affects the quality of life of affected individuals. Current treatment options for PN in Japan are limited. To evaluate the optimal dose, efficacy and safety of long-term treatment with nemolizumab in patients with PN in Japan. In a 16-week double-blind phase II/III study, patients aged ≥ 13 years with PN were randomly assigned (1 : 1 : 1) to nemolizumab 30-mg, 60-mg or placebo groups, with concomitant topical corticosteroids, every 4 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the percentage change in the weekly mean Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS) score (range 0-10, with higher scores indicating worse itching) from baseline to week 16. Secondary efficacy endpoints assessed the impact of treatment on pruritus, PN severity, sleep and quality of life. At week 16, the least-squares mean percentage change from baseline in the PP-NRS score was -61.1% in the nemolizumab 30-mg group (n = 77), -56.0% in the 60-mg group (n = 76), and -18.6% in the placebo group (n = 76). Differences between both nemolizumab groups and placebo were significant; the difference between the 30-mg and placebo groups was -42.5% [95% confidence interval (CI) -51.9 to -33.1; P < 0.0001], and between the 60-mg and placebo groups was -37.4% (95% CI -46.7 to -28.1; P < 0.0001). Patients treated with nemolizumab also had greater improvements in the number and severity of prurigo nodules, and in sleep and quality of life compared with the placebo group. Both nemolizumab doses were well tolerated. Improvements in PN were greater following nemolizumab treatment, despite continuation of topical corticosteroids in both groups.

Paroxetine controlled release (CR) is approved for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in the dosage range of 25 to 62.5 mg daily. However, lower daily doses (12.5 mg and 25 mg) of this formulation have not been investigated in the treatment of MDD. If the 12.5-mg and 25-mg doses are found to be efficacious, these lower doses may well convey a superior tolerability profile for paroxetine CR in the treatment of MDD. To evaluate the antidepressant efficacy and tolerability profile of daily doses of paroxetine CR 12.5 mg and 25 mg versus placebo in the treatment of MDD. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial conducted in 40 clinical investigation centers in the United States. 447 adult (> or = 18 years of age) outpatients who met DSM-IV criteria for MDD and with a baseline 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) score of at least 20 comprised the intent-to-treat study population (mean age = 38.8 years; 58.4% female; 75.6% white). Eligible patients completing a 1-week single-blind placebo run-in period were randomly assigned to receive once-a-day study medication (paroxetine CR 12.5 mg [N = 156], paroxetine CR 25 mg [N = 154], or placebo [N = 149]) in an 8-week, double-blind, parallel cell comparison. The primary efficacy measure was the change from baseline to study endpoint (week 8) as measured by the HAM-D. Secondary efficacy measures included change from baseline to study endpoint as assessed by both the depressed mood item on the HAM-D and the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) Severity of Illness scale (CGI-S). The proportion of patients considered at study endpoint to be in response (CGI-Improvement score of 1 or 2) or in remission (HAM-D < or = 7) in the 3 treatment groups was also compared. Quality of life was assessed by the change from baseline in total score of the short form of the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (Q-LES-Q). Safety observations were made by assessing the proportion of patients who had adverse experiences, including laboratory and electrocardiographic abnormalities, during the treatment period. The primary efficacy analysis revealed that both the 12.5-mg and the 25-mg paroxetine CR treatment groups were associated with significant therapeutic effects (change in HAM-D score) from baseline to study endpoint (LOCF: p = .038, 95% CI = -3.38 to -0.09 and p = .005, 95% CI = -4.06 to -0.74, respectively). Results from the Wilcoxon rank sum test of the depressed mood item of the HAM-D (p = .011, 95% CI = -0.57 to -0.07) demonstrated significant efficacy in the 25-mg treatment group but not in the 12.5-mg group. However, LOCF analysis of the CGI-S revealed significant therapeutic effects for both the 12.5-mg (p = .018, 95% CI = -0.61 to -0.06) and 25-mg (p < .001, 95% CI = -0.78 to -0.22) treatment groups. Significantly more patients in the 25-mg paroxetine CR-treated group than in the placebo-treated group met criteria for response (CGI-Improvement score of 1 or 2, p = .035, OR = 1.68, 95% CI = 1.04 to 2.73) as well as for remission (HAM-D score </= 7, p = .013, OR = 1.96, 95% CI = 1.15 to 3.33). Neither HAM-D remission analysis nor CGI responder analysis showed statistical separation from placebo for paroxetine CR 12.5-mg treatment. Quality of life improvements were statistically significant for the 25-mg treatment (p = .041, 95% CI = 0.17 to 8.03) on the Q-LES-Q total score. Post hoc LOCF analyses of HAM-D sleep disturbance, psychic anxiety, and anxiety/somatization factors revealed significant improvements from baseline in the paroxetine CR 25-mg and 12.5-mg treatment groups. The types of adverse events reported in the 12.5-mg and 25-mg groups were similar to those reported with paroxetine CR at the customary 25-mg to 62.5-mg range; however, the lower doses of paroxetine CR were associated with a relatively reduced incident rate of these adverse events and an overall improved tolerability compared with the incident rate and tolerability profile associated with the customary dose range of paroxetine CR (25 to 62.5 mg). Paroxetine CR, at 12.5 mg/day and 25 mg/day, demonstrated significant antidepressant effects.

To determine the safety and efficacy of intravenous (IV) pamidronate treatment in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients who have had a suboptimal response to nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Pamidronate at 60 mg was compared with pamidronate at 10 mg rather than placebo in view of the high incidence of transient arthralgias upon first IV exposure to the drug. The drug were given monthly for 6 months in a randomized double-blind, controlled trial. The inclusion criterion was active disease (Bath AS Disease Activity Index [BASDAI] of > or = 4 or morning stiffness of > or = 45 minutes) despite stable NSAID therapy. The primary outcome measure was the BASDAI, and secondary outcomes included the Bath AS Functional Index (BASFI), Bath AS Global Index (BASGI), Bath AS Metrology Index (BASMI), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP) level, and percentage of patients achieving a reduction of > or = 25% in the BASDAI. Outcome assessments were done at -2, 0, 12, and 24 weeks, and analysis was by intent to treat. Eighty-four AS patients (67 men and 17 women; mean age 39.6 years and mean disease duration 15.1 years) were enrolled. Dosage groups were well matched at baseline for demographics, disease activity, and functional indices. At 6 months, the mean BASDAI had decreased by 2.22 (34.5%) in the 60-mg group and by 0.93 (15%) in the 10-mg group (P = 0.002). Significantly greater reductions in the 60-mg group were also noted for the BASFI (P < 0.001), BASGI (P = 0.01), and BASMI (P = 0.03). Significantly more patients achieved a reduction of > or = 25% in the BASDAI in the 60-mg group versus the 10-mg group (63.4% versus 30.2%; P = 0.004). Differences in ESR/CRP were not significant (NS). Withdrawals included 9 (20.9%) from the 10-mg group and 3 (7.3%) from the 60-mg group (P NS). Adverse events were confined to transient arthralgias/myalgias after the first IV infusion, occurring in 68.3% and 46.5% of patients in the 60-mg and 10-mg groups, respectively (P NS). Pamidronate has dose-dependent therapeutic properties in AS.

Trials of antidepressant medications for smoking cessation have had mixed results. We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of a sustained-release form of bupropion for smoking cessation. We excluded smokers with current depression, but not those with a history of major depression. The 615 subjects were randomly assigned to receive placebo or bupropion at a dose of 100, 150, or 300 mg per day for seven weeks. The target quitting date (or "target quit date") was one week after the beginning of treatment. Brief counseling was provided at base line, weekly during treatment, and at 8, 12, 26, and 52 weeks. Self-reported abstinence was confirmed by a carbon monoxide concentration in expired air of 10 ppm or less. At the end of seven weeks of treatment, the rates of smoking cessation as confirmed by carbon monoxide measurements were 19.0 percent in the placebo group, 28.8 percent in the 100-mg group, 38.6 percent in the 150-mg group, and 44.2 percent in the 300-mg group (P<0.001). At one year the respective rates were 12.4 percent, 19.6 percent, 22.9 percent, and 23.1 percent. The rates for the 150-mg group (P=0.02) and the 300-mg group (P=0.01) -- but not the 100-mg group (P=0.09) -- were significantly better than those for the placebo group. Among the subjects who were continuously abstinent through the end of treatment, the mean absolute weight gain was inversely associated with the dose (a gain of 2.9 kg in the placebo group, 2.3 kg in 100-mg and 150-mg groups, and 1.5 kg in the 300-mg group; P= 0.02). No effects of treatment were observed on depression scores as measured serially by the Beck Depression Inventory. Thirty-seven subjects stopped treatment prematurely because of adverse events; the frequency was similar among all groups. A sustained-release form of bupropion was effective for smoking cessation and was accompanied by reduced weight gain and minimal side effects. Many participants in all groups were smoking at one year.

A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Multicenter Proof-of-Concept (POC) Study to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of the Novel Allosteric AKT Inhibitor, VAD044, in Adults with Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia (HHT)

Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) is the most common single cause of dementia in our ageing society. Traditionally thought of as an untreatable degenerative condition, recent advances in drug therapy have challenged this view. The disease is characterised by an insidious decline in cognitive and non-cognitive function. Classically, short and long-term memory is impaired while language skills, concentration and attention are often affected. This results in impaired ability to learn and retain new skills as well as the loss of existing ones. Non-cognitive function is the global term used to describe problems such as depression, agitation, personality changes, delusions and hallucinations. These factors have a significant impact on patient behaviour and a very real impact on the quality of life for both patients and caregivers. Diagnosis of AD is clinically based, and using the NINCDS-ADRDA criteria (Table 1) [1], a diagnosis of probable or possible AD can be made. Definitive diagnosis relies on pathological confirmation, which in the majority of cases is rarely completed. With the development of AD specific treatments, definition of AD from other types of dementia is very important. Table 1 NINCDS-ADRDA Criteria for clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Pathogenesis The pathogenesis of AD has not yet been elucidated. It is widely accepted that a combination of genetic susceptibility factors and environmental triggers are responsible for late onset sporadic AD, the most common form of the disease. An understanding of the disease mechanism remains elusive, and is the key to developing a disease modifying agent. Currently, it is proposed that beta amyloid protein, abnormal tau protein or possibly both play key factors in the development of disease. It has been widely postulated that oxidative damage and a slow inflammatory process are two possible mechanisms involved. As yet, no product with proven disease modifying properties is available, and current treatments offer symptomatic benefit only. The development of acetylcholinesterase (AChe) inhibitor drugs has followed the finding that cholinergic pathways in the cerebral cortex and basal forebrain are compromised in AD [2] and the resultant cholinergic deficit contributes to the cognitive impairment of these patients [3]. Although many believe this ‘cholinergic hypothesis’ to be important, others feel it represents a less significant component of the disease process [4]. Many other neurotransmitters are affected in AD, and the relative importance of each in relation to clinical findings has not been fully elucidated. Initial work focused on the use of acetylcholine precursors, using a similar rationale to dopamine therapy in Parkinson’s disease. A series of small trials using precursors such as choline and phosphatidylcholine showed no reliable improvement in cognitive function, with only 10 out of 43 trials reporting any positive effect [5]. There has been renewed interest in muscarinic agonists drugs, which when first introduced, had major problems with adverse cholinergic effects. Better understanding of the molecular pathology of muscarinic receptors and their subtypes has led to the development of more specific agonists. Drugs such as xanomeline, milameline, and civimeline have reached clinical trials, and the improvements seen in cognitive function are reviewed by Avery et al. [6]. There are also claims that these drugs have disease modifying properties, with effects on APP processing and tau phosphorylation. Muscarinic agonists remain in trial, but have yet to fulfil their potential in AD treatment. The only group of drugs currently licensed for AD treatment is the AChe inhibitors, which act through inhibition of the enzyme acetylcholinesterase (AChe), responsible for the breakdown of ACh in the neural synapse. A meta-analysis of the early AChe inhibitor treatments was encouraging [7] and these proceeded to larger placebo controlled double-blind trials.

Efficacy and Safety of Omalizumab in Patients with Chronic Idiopathic/Spontaneous Urticaria Who Remain Symptomatic on H1 Antihistamines: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study

Onercept for Moderate-to-Severe Crohn’s Disease: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Two doses of omeprazole versus placebo in symptomatic erosive esophagitis: The U.S. multicenter study