Double-blind Maintenance Phase Research Articles

Etrolizumab for maintenance therapy in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (LAUREL): a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 study

Etrolizumab is a gut-targeted anti-β7 integrin monoclonal antibody. In a previous phase 2 induction study, etrolizumab significantly improved clinical remission versus placebo in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of etrolizumab for maintenance of remission in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. We conducted a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 study (LAUREL) across 111 treatment centres worldwide. We included adults (age 18-80 years) with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (Mayo Clinic total score [MCS] of 6-12 with an endoscopic subscore of ≥2, a rectal bleeding subscore of ≥1, and a stool frequency subscore of ≥1) who were naive to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors. Patients were required to have had an established diagnosis of ulcerative colitis for at least 3 months, corroborated by both clinical and endoscopic evidence, and evidence of disease extending at least 20 cm from the anal verge. During open-label induction, participants received subcutaneous etrolizumab 105 mg once every 4 weeks. Participants who had clinical response at week 10 (MCS with ≥3-point decrease and ≥30% reduction from baseline, plus ≥1-point decrease in rectal bleeding subscore or absolute rectal bleeding score of 0 or 1) proceeded into the double-blind maintenance phase and were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive subcutaneous etrolizumab 105 mg once every 4 weeks or matched placebo until week 62. Randomisation was stratified by baseline concomitant treatment with corticosteroids, treatment with immunosuppressants, baseline disease activity, and week 10 remission status. All participants and study site personnel were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was remission at week 62 (MCS ≤2, with individual subscores ≤1, and rectal bleeding subscore of 0) among patients with a clinical response at week 10, measured in the modified intention-to-treat population (all randomised patients who received at least one dose of study drug). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02165215, and is now closed to recruitment. Between Aug 12, 2014, and June 4, 2020, 658 patients were screened for eligibility and 359 were enrolled into the induction phase. 214 (60%) patients had a clinical response at week 10 and were randomly assigned to receive etrolizumab (n=108) or placebo (n=106) in the maintenance phase. 80 (74%) patients in the etrolizumab group and 42 (40%) in the placebo group completed the study through week 62. Four patients in the placebo group did not receive study treatment and were excluded from the analyses. At week 62, 32 (29·6%) of 108 patients in the etrolizumab group and 21 (20·6%) of 102 in the placebo group were in remission (adjusted treatment difference 7·7% [95% CI -4·2 to 19·2]; p=0·19). A greater proportion of patients reported one or more adverse events in the placebo group (82 [80%] of 102) than in the etrolizumab group (70 [65%] of 108); the most common adverse event in both groups was ulcerative colitis (16 [15%] patients in the etrolizumab group and 37 [36%] in the placebo group). Ten (9%) patients in the etrolizumab group and eight (8%) in the placebo group reported one or more serious adverse events. No deaths were reported in either treatment group. No significant differences were observed between maintenance etrolizumab and placebo in the primary endpoint of remission at week 62 among patients who had a clinical response at week 10. Etrolizumab was well tolerated in this population and no new safety signals were identified. F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Efficacy and safety of a new vedolizumab subcutaneous formulation in Japanese patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis.

Background/AimsA subgroup analysis was conducted in Japanese patients with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC) enrolled in the phase 3 VISIBLE 1 study, which evaluated the safety and efficacy of a new vedolizumab subcutaneous (SC) formulation.MethodsEligible patients received open-label infusions of vedolizumab 300 mg intravenous (IV) at weeks 0 and 2 in the induction phase. Patients with clinical response by complete Mayo score at week 6 entered the double-blind maintenance phase and were randomized to vedolizumab 108 mg SC every 2 weeks, placebo, or vedolizumab 300 mg IV every 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was clinical remission (complete Mayo score ≤ 2 points; no individual subscore > 1 point) at week 52.ResultsOf 49 patients who entered the induction phase, 22 out of 49 patients (45%) had clinical response at week 6 and were randomized to vedolizumab 108 mg SC (n = 10), placebo (n = 10), or vedolizumab 300 mg IV (n = 2). At week 52, 4 out of 10 patients (40%) who received vedolizumab SC had clinical remission versus 2 out of 10 patients (20%) who received placebo (difference: 20% [95% confidence interval, –27.9 to 61.8]). Two patients (2/10, 20%) who received vedolizumab SC experienced an injection-site reaction versus none who received placebo.ConclusionsOur results indicate that the efficacy of vedolizumab SC in a subgroup of Japanese patients with UC are similar with those in the overall VISIBLE 1 study population, and with those established with vedolizumab IV. The safety and tolerability of vedolizumab SC were generally similar to that established for vedolizumab IV. (ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT02611830; EudraCT 2015-000480-14)

Apomorphine sublingual film for off episodes in Parkinson's disease: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study

Many patients with Parkinson's disease have potentially disabling off episodes that are not predictably responsive to levodopa. In this study, we assessed the safety and efficacy of apomorphine sublingual film as an on-demand therapy for off episodes in patients with Parkinson's disease. This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was done by movement disorder specialists at 32 sites in the USA and one in Canada. Patients with Parkinson's disease who had 2 h or more of off time per day with predictable morning off periods, were responsive to levodopa, and were on stable doses of anti-parkinsonian medication were eligible. In an open-label titration phase, increasing doses of apomorphine sublingual film (10-35 mg) were administered until a tolerable full on response was achieved. Patients were then randomly assigned (1:1) with an interactive web-response system to receive the effective dose of apomorphine sublingual film or matching placebo in a 12-week, double-blind maintenance phase. Randomisation was not stratified, and the block size was four. All patients and study personnel were masked to treatment assignments. The primary endpoint was the in-clinic change from predose to 30 min post-dose in the Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) part 3 (motor) score at week 12, analysed on a modified intention-to-treat population by use of a mixed-effect model for repeated measures. Safety analyses were done on all enrolled patients who received at least one dose of study medication. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02469090. Between June 18, 2015, and Dec 11, 2017, 109 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive apomorphine sublingual film (n=54) or placebo (n=55). All patients received the assigned study treatment, and 34 (63%) of 54 patients receiving apomorphine sublingual film and 46 (84%) of 55 receiving placebo completed the study. Least squares mean (SE) change from predose to 30 min post-dose in MDS-UPDRS part 3 score at week 12 was -11·1 (SE 1·46, 95% CI -14·0 to -8·2) with apomorphine sublingual film and -3·5 (1·29, -6·1 to -0·9) with placebo (difference -7·6, SE 1·96, 95% CI -11·5 to -3·7; p=0·0002). Mild-to-moderate oropharyngeal events were the most common side-effect, reported in 17 (31%) of 54 patients receiving apomorphine sublingual film and in four (7%) of 55 patients receiving placebo, leading to treatment discontinuation in nine (17%) patients treated with apomorphine and in one (2%) patient treated with placebo. Other treatment-emergent adverse events were transient nausea (in 15 [28%] patients receiving apomorphine sublingual film), somnolence (seven [13%]), and dizziness (five [9%]). Orthostatic hypotension, syncope, dyskinesia, hallucinations, prolongation of the QT interval, and impulse control disorders were infrequent (prevalence ≤2% of all patients) or did not occur. One patient treated with apomorphine sublingual film (with known cardiac risk factors) had a fatal cardiac arrest. Although nearly a third of patients discontinued treatment primarily because of oropharyngeal side-effects, apomorphine sublingual film provided an efficacious, on-demand treatment for off episodes for most patients with Parkinson's disease in this trial. The long-term safety and efficacy of apomorphine sublingual film are currently being investigated. Cynapsus Therapeutics and Sunovion.

Brexpiprazole for the maintenance treatment of adults with schizophrenia: an evidence-based review and place in therapy.

The purpose of this review is to describe the available data for brexpiprazole in the maintenance treatment of schizophrenia. This objective was completed by searching the databases PubMed, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify relevant study results presented as papers or abstracts. In summary, brexpiprazole is a new agent in the D2 partial agonist class that has a unique receptor-binding profile, based in part on high affinity for serotonin 5HT1A and 5HT2A receptors, paired with lower intrinsic activity at dopamine D2 receptors. The average dose used in efficacy and safety studies for the maintenance treatment of schizophrenia ranged from 3.0 and 3.1 mg in the open-label safety studies to 3.6 mg in the double-blind randomized relapse-prevention study. Highlights from the 52-week double-blind placebo-controlled relapse-prevention trial evidenced rates of relapse in the brexpiprazole group of 13.5% vs 38.5% in the placebo group (number needed to treat 4, 95% CI 3–8; P<0.0001). Safety data indicate that brexpiprazole is tolerated well, with rates of discontinuation due to treatment-emergent adverse events that ranged from 5.2% of those taking brexpiprazole in the double-blind maintenance phase of the relapse-prevention trial to 15.3% in a 52-week open-label safety study. In the available trials, there were relatively low rates of akathisia, and the degree of weight gain was similar to that seen in studies with aripiprazole for the treatment of schizophrenia. Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale scores also remained relatively stable in the open-label safety studies. Available data indicate that brexpiprazole is an effective agent for the maintenance treatment of schizophrenia that is overall well tolerated.

Dual Delayed-Release Dexlansoprazole for Healing and Maintenance of Healed Erosive Esophagitis: A Safety Study in Adolescents

BackgroundIn gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), the frequency of heartburn symptoms and erosive esophagitis (EE) increases with age in children and adolescents. Proton pump inhibitor, dexlansoprazole, is approved for healing EE of all grades, maintenance of healed EE, relief of heartburn, and treatment of symptomatic non-erosive GERD in patients ≥ 12 years.AimTo assess safety and efficacy of dexlansoprazole dual delayed-release capsule in healing of EE and maintenance of healed EE in adolescents.MethodsA multicenter, phase 2, 36-week study was conducted in 62 adolescents (12–17 years) with endoscopically confirmed EE. Patients received dexlansoprazole 60 mg once daily (QD) during open-label healing phase. Those with confirmed healing at week 8 were randomized to dexlansoprazole 30 mg QD or placebo during 16-week, double-blind maintenance phase, with subsequent treatment-free follow-up of ≥ 12 weeks. Primary endpoints were treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in ≥ 5% of patients during treatment. Secondary endpoints included percentages of patients with healing of EE and with maintenance of healed EE.Results88% of patients achieved EE healing, and 61.3% reported a TEAE [headache (12.9%), oropharyngeal pain (8.1%), diarrhea (6.5%), and nasopharyngitis (6.5%)]. During maintenance phase, healing was maintained in 82% and 58% of dexlansoprazole and placebo groups, respectively. 72.0% of dexlansoprazole-treated patients reported TEAEs, which included headache (24.0%), abdominal pain (12.0%), nasopharyngitis (12.0%), pharyngitis (12.0%), sinusitis (12.0%), bronchitis (8.0%), upper respiratory tract infection (8.0%), and insomnia (8.0%); 61.5% experienced a TEAE with placebo.ConclusionsDexlansoprazole is safe and efficacious for healing EE and maintenance of healed EE in adolescents.

Analgesic efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a long-acting abuse-deterrent formulation of oxycodone for moderate-to-severe chronic low back pain in subjects successfully switched from immediate-release oxycodone.

ObjectivesThis post hoc analysis of data from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, enriched-enrollment randomized-withdrawal Phase III study evaluated the safety, tolerability, and analgesic efficacy of Oxycodone DETERx extended-release (ER), abuse-deterrent capsules (Xtampza® ER) in subjects with chronic low back pain who were successfully transitioned from immediate-release (IR) oxycodone.MethodsContinuous outcomes were analyzed using a mixed-model repeated-measures approach; binomial outcomes were analyzed using chi-squared; and time-to-event outcomes using Kaplan–Meier analyses.ResultsA total of 110 subjects previously prescribed IR oxycodone entered the Open-label Titration Phase. Forty-four subjects were randomized to Oxycodone DETERx (n=22) or placebo (n=22) in the 12-week Double-blind Maintenance Phase. Efficacy results in this subgroup showed a statistically significant difference between Oxycodone DETERx and placebo in average pain intensity scores from Randomization Baseline to Week 12 (least squares mean [± standard error], −1.88 [0.70]; P=0.0078). Additional efficacy results indicated that Oxycodone DETERx vs placebo was associated with a statistically significant benefit in durability of effect from Week 2 through Week 12 (P<0.01), numbers of subjects with a ≥30% (n [%] 10 [45.5%] vs 0 [0%]; P=0.0004) and ≥50% (10 [45.5%] vs 0 [0%]; P=0.0004) improvement in pain intensity, longer time-to-exit (P=0.0014), a greater number of subjects who completed the study (14 [63.6%] vs 4 [18.2%]), and less rescue medication use (acetaminophen; mean [SD], 163.5 [337.8] mg) vs 216.2 [377.3] mg). Adverse event profiles were consistent with opioid class effects and results from the original study; Oxycodone DETERx was well tolerated in subjects previously treated with short-acting oxycodone.ConclusionsOxycodone DETERx resulted in clinically meaningful and statistically significant efficacy in subjects with chronic low back pain who were previously prescribed IR oxycodone and were successfully switched to ER Oxycodone DETERx.

Fluticasone in mild to moderate atopic dermatitis relapse: A randomized controlled trial

BackgroundThe long-term efficacy of corticosteroids to prevent atopic dermatitis (AD) relapses has partially been addressed in children. This study compared an intermittent dosing regimen of fluticasone propionate (FP) cream 0.05% with its vehicle base in reducing the risk of relapse in children with stabilized AD. MethodsA randomized controlled, multicentric, double-blind trial was conducted. Children (2–10 years) with mild/moderate AD (exclusion criteria: >30% affected body surface area and/or head) were enrolled into an Open-label Stabilization Phase (OSP) of up to 2 weeks on twice daily FP. Those who achieved treatment success entered the Double-blind Maintenance Phase (DMP). They were randomly allocated to receive FP or vehicle twice-weekly on consecutive days for 16 weeks. The primary study endpoint was relapse rate; time to relapse and severity of disease were also studied. Kaplan–Meier estimates were calculated. ResultsFifty-four patients (29 girls) entered the OSP (23 mild AD) and 49 (26 girls) continued into the DMP. Mean age was 5.5 (SD: 2.8) and 5.1 (SD: 2.3) yrs for FP and vehicle groups, respectively. Four patients withdrew from the DMP (two in every group). Patients treated with FP twice weekly had a 2.7 fold lower risk of experiencing a relapse than patients treated with vehicle (relative risk 2.72, SD: 1.28; p=0.034). FP was also superior to vehicle for delaying time to relapse. Both treatment therapies were well tolerated. ConclusionThis long-term study shows that twice weekly FP provides an effective maintenance treatment to control the risk of relapse in children with AD.

Oral Aripiprazole as Maintenance Treatment in Adolescent Schizophrenia: Results From a 52-Week, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Withdrawal Study

To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of aripiprazole, a dopamine D2 receptor partial agonist, as maintenance treatment in adolescent outpatients with schizophrenia. This was a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized withdrawal design trial. Participants 13 to 17 years of age with a diagnosis of schizophrenia (DSM-IV-TR) were first cross-titrated from their other oral antipsychotic(s) (4-6 weeks), then stabilized (7-21 weeks) on oral aripiprazole 10 to 30 mg/d, and finally randomized 2:1 to continuation of oral aripiprazole or to placebo in a double-blind maintenance phase (≤52 weeks). The primary endpoint was time from randomization to exacerbation of psychotic symptoms/impending relapse. Safety and tolerability were assessed. Of 201 enrolled participants, 146 were randomized to aripiprazole (n= 98) or placebo (n= 48) in the double-blind maintenance phase. Treatment with aripiprazole was associated with a significantly longer time to exacerbation of psychotic symptoms/impending relapse compared with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.46 [95% CI= 0.24-0.88]; p= .016). Aripiprazole was associated with lower rates of serious treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) versus placebo (3.1% versus 12.5%; p= .059) and severe TEAEs (2.0% versus 10.4%; p= .039). The rate of discontinuation due to TEAEs was lower with aripiprazole versus placebo (20.4% versus 39.6%, p= .014; number-needed-to-harm= 5.1). The incidences of extrapyramidal symptoms, weight gain, and somnolence were similar or lower with aripiprazole than with placebo, and no TEAEs related to elevated serum prolactin were reported. Based on Tanner staging, 27.6% of participants treated with aripiprazole and 16.7% of those who received placebo progressed one or two stages from baseline. Aripiprazole was observed to be safe and effective for the maintenance treatment of adolescents with schizophrenia. Efficacy and Safety Study of Oral Aripiprazole in Adolescents With Schizophrenia; http://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT01149655.

Effectiveness of silk fabric underwear as an adjuvant tool in the management of vulvar lichen simplex chronicus: results of a double-blind randomized controlled trial.

Avoiding potentially irritating contact is a key point in vulvar lichen simplex chronicus (VLSC) management. This study aims to assess the use of nonirritating silk fabric underwear (Dermasilk) as an adjuvant tool in the treatment of VLSC. Twenty women with VLSC were enrolled in a 1-week open-label active treatment phase with topical 0.1% mometasone furoate (MMF) ointment. Participants then entered a 4-week double-blind maintenance phase (MP) in which they were randomized to wear either silk fabric or cotton briefs. During MP, participants were allowed to use MMF on an "as-needed" basis. The main efficacy endpoints were to assess and compare the two intervention groups on the following: (1) number of participants who needed to apply MMF throughout MP; (2) mean number of MMF applications; (3) mean symptom-free interval before MMF reapplication; and (4) changes in the severity of symptoms and signs. During MP, four women in the silk fabric briefs group applied MMF compared with six women in the cotton briefs group (relative risk, 0.66). The mean number of MMF applications was lower in the silk fabric briefs group than in the cotton briefs group (P = 0.074). VLSC symptom-free interval was 22.5 days in the silk fabric briefs group and 7.2 days in the cotton briefs group (P = 0.0003). At the end of MP, symptom improvement determined after corticosteroid use increased in the silk fabric briefs group but worsened in the cotton briefs group. Silk fabric underwear may be a useful tool for the management of VLSC by diminishing external sources of irritation and may reduce use of corticosteroids.

2277 – A placebo-controlled study of efficacy and safety of aripiprazole once-monthly for long-term maintenance treatment in schizophrenia

Objective Evaluate the efficacy and long-term safety of investigational aripiprazole once-monthly (ARI-OM) for maintenance treatment in schizophrenia. Methods Patients requiring chronic treatment for schizophrenia, not on aripiprazole monotherapy, were cross-titrated from other antipsychotic(s) to aripiprazole in an oral conversion phase (Phase 1). All patients entered an oral aripiprazole stabilization phase (Phase 2). Patients meeting stability criteria entered an ARI-OM stabilization phase (Phase 3), with coadministration of oral aripiprazole for the first 2 weeks. Patients meeting stability criteria were randomized to ARI-OM or placebo once-monthly (placebo-OM) during a 52-week, double-blind maintenance phase (Phase 4). Primary endpoint was time-to-impending relapse. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. Results 710 patients entered Phase 2, 576 Phase 3 and 403 Phase 4 (ARI-OM=269, placebo-OM=134). The study was terminated early because efficacy was demonstrated by a pre-planned interim analysis. Time-to-impending relapse was significantly delayed with ARI-OM vs. placebo-OM (p 5% incidence in any phase. Headache, somnolence, and nausea had a peak first onset within the first 4 weeks of treatment. There were no unusual shifts in all phases in laboratory values, fasting metabolic parameters, weight, or objective scales of movement disorders. Conclusions ARI-OM significantly delayed time-to-impending relapse compared with placebo-OM and was well tolerated as maintenance treatment in schizophrenia 1 .

Aripiprazole Intramuscular Depot as Maintenance Treatment in Patients With Schizophrenia

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a once-monthly intramuscular (IM) depot formulation of the dopamine partial agonist aripiprazole as maintenance treatment in adults meeting DSM-IV-TR schizophrenia criteria. The study was conducted from July 2008 until February 2011. Subjects requiring chronic treatment with an antipsychotic entered a 4- to 12-week oral stabilization phase and received oral aripiprazole (10-30 mg/d). Subjects meeting stability criteria for 4 weeks entered an IM-depot stabilization phase in which they received 400-mg aripiprazole-IM-depot injections every 4 weeks (single decrease to 300 mg permitted) with coadministration of oral aripiprazole tablets in the first 2 weeks. Subjects meeting stability criteria for 12 consecutive weeks were randomly assigned (2:1) to aripiprazole-IM-depot or placebo during a 52-week, double-blind maintenance phase. The primary outcome measure was time to exacerbation of psychotic symptoms/impending relapse (event). Safety and tolerability were also assessed. 710 patients entered oral stabilization, 576 progressed to IM-depot stabilization, and 403 were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment. The study was terminated early because efficacy was demonstrated by the preplanned interim analysis (conducted after 64 events). Time to impending relapse was significantly delayed with aripiprazole-IM-depot treatment compared with placebo in both the interim analysis and the final analysis (P < .0001, log-rank test). The hazard ratio (placebo/aripiprazole-IM-depot) at final analysis was 5.03 (95% CI, 3.15-8.02). The rate of impending relapse was significantly lower with aripiprazole-IM-depot than placebo at endpoint (final analysis, 10.0% [n = 27/269] vs 39.6% [n = 53/134]). Improvements in Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale and Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total scores were maintained with aripiprazole-IM-depot treatment but showed significant worsening with placebo (change from double-blind baseline, P < .0001 for aripiprazole-IM-depot vs placebo). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (occurring in ≥ 5% of aripiprazole-IM-depot subjects and greater than placebo) were insomnia, tremor, and headache. Aripiprazole-IM-depot significantly delayed time to impending relapse compared with placebo and appears to be a well-tolerated maintenance treatment option for schizophrenia. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00705783.

Efficacy and tolerability of tapentadol extended release (ER) in patients with chronic, painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN): results of a phase 3, randomized-withdrawal, placebo-controlled study

This Phase 3, randomized-withdrawal, placebo-controlled study (NCT01041859) evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of tapentadol ER for the management of neuropathic pain associated with DPN. Adult patients with moderate to severe, painful DPN with symptoms for ≥6 months and ≥3-month history of analgesic use for painful DPN were titrated to an optimal dose (balancing efficacy and tolerability) of tapentadol ER (100-250 mg bid) during a 3-week open-label period. At the end of the titration period, patients with ≥1-point reduction in pain intensity from the beginning to end of titration were randomized (1:1) to receive placebo or their pre-determined optimal dose of tapentadol ER for 12 weeks (double-blind, fixed dose, maintenance phase). The primary efficacy endpoint was mean change in average pain intensity (recorded twice daily [average pain during previous 12 hours]; 11-point NRS) from the start to Week 12 (LOCF) of the double-blind maintenance phase. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were recorded. A total of 358 patients completed the open-label titration period; 318 patients (placebo, n=152; tapentadol ER, n=166) were randomized and received ≥1 dose of study medication. At the start versus Week 12 of double-blind maintenance, respectively, mean (SD) pain intensity was: tapentadol ER, 3.70 (1.78) versus 4.01 (2.23); placebo, 3.35 (2.17) versus 4.83 (2.60). Mean (SD) change in average pain intensity from the start to Week 12 of the double-blind maintenance phase was: tapentadol ER, 0.28 (2.042); placebo, 1.30 (2.428) (least-squares mean difference for tapentadol ER vs placebo, –0.95 [95% CI, –1.415 to –0.493]; P <0.001 favoring tapentadol ER). TEAEs (≥10%) reported in the tapentadol ER group during double-blind maintenance were nausea (21.1%) and vomiting (12.7%). Tapentadol ER (100-250 mg bid) was effective and well tolerated for the management of moderate to severe, neuropathic pain associated with DPN in adults. Supported by Janssen Research & Development, L.L.C., and Grünenthal GmbH.

Aripiprazole plus divalproex for recently manic or mixed patients with bipolar I disorder: a 6‐month, randomized, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind maintenance trial

The goal of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy in preventing relapse of a mood episode in recently manic or mixed episode patients with bipolar I disorder stabilized with aripiprazole and divalproex combination. This randomized, 24-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter study enrolled patients from 23 centers in Korea. Patients with bipolar I disorder who had manic or mixed episode entered a 6-week open-label stabilization phase. After meeting stabilization criteria, 83 patients were randomly assigned to placebo + divalproex or aripiprazole + divalproex treatment group for the 24-week, double-blind maintenance phase. During the 6-month double-blind treatment, the time to relapse of any mood episode in the aripiprazole group was longer than the placebo group, but the difference did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.098). After controlling for mean divalproex level, the time to depressive episode relapse in the aripiprazole group was longer than those in the placebo group (p = 0.029). Weight gain (≥ 7% increase) occurred in 22.5% aripiprazole group and 18.6% placebo group (p = 0.787). In this study, relapse of mood episode occurred fewer and later for aripiprazole with divalproex treatment than divalproex monotherapy, but the differences were not statistically significant.

Predictors of relapse or recurrence in bipolar I disorder

Bipolar disorder represents a major public health concern and, despite treatment, is characterized by recurring episodes of mania, depression, or mixed states. Prevention of relapse or recurrence is a primary treatment objective in the management of the disorder. The objective of the current study was to identify predictors of relapse/recurrence in patients with bipolar I disorder treated with olanzapine, lithium, divalproex, or olanzapine plus divalproex/lithium. Data from four clinical trials studying the efficacy of olanzapine compared to placebo and active comparators (lithium, divalproex, olanzapine plus divalproex/lithium) for bipolar I disorder were pooled for this analysis. Patients achieving remission after pharmacological treatment and entering randomized double-blind maintenance phase for 44 to 72 weeks were included. Cox Proportional Hazard models and Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to determine predictors of relapse/recurrence for the pooled data and within each treatment group. A total of 929 patients meeting the criteria for remission and followed by maintenance treatment were included in this analysis, and 427 patients (46.0%) experienced symptomatic relapse/recurrence during the follow-up period. A 21-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-21) total score<4, gender, rapid cycling and treatment emerged as significant predictors of relapse/recurrence and may be generalized to treatment with olanzapine and to some extent to treatment with lithium and divalproex. The results on treatment-specific predictors of relapse/recurrence are considered to be exploratory and no adjustments were made for multiple comparisons. The major findings from this study suggest that a HAMD-21 total score<4 may be a better predictor of maintenance of remission in bipolar I patients than HAMD-21 total score<8. The prophylactic effect of olanzapine, lithium, divalproex, olanzapine plus divalproex or lithium, and placebo was assessed and baseline predictors of relapse/recurrence were identified.

Sexual Function during Long‐Term Duloxetine Treatment in Patients with Recurrent Major Depressive Disorder

Sexual dysfunction (SD) is frequently associated with major depressive disorder (MDD) in the untreated state and may be worsened by antidepressant treatment. We evaluated SD in duloxetine-treated patients during an MDD recurrence prevention study. Patients (N = 514) received open-label duloxetine 60-120 mg/day for up to 34 weeks. Responders (N = 288) were randomly assigned to duloxetine or placebo during a further 52-week double-blind maintenance phase. The Arizona Sexual Experience Scale (ASEX) was used to assess sexual functioning. At study entry, 73.4% of patients met ASEX criteria for SD. After open-label duloxetine treatment, the probability of continued SD was 77.9% for nonresponders and 53.2% for responders. In patients without SD at study entry, the probability of emergent SD was 49.6% (nonresponders) and 33.2% (responders). In the double-blind maintenance phase, there was no significant difference (P = 0.105) in the probability of emergent SD between placebo-treated (49.2%) and duloxetine-treated (27.9%) patients without SD at baseline, with no significant treatment-by-gender interaction. In patients with a recurrence of MDD, the probability of emergent SD was similar between placebo- (71.3%) and duloxetine-treated (82.7%) patients. However, in patients with no recurrence of MDD, the probability of emergent SD in placebo patients (40.0%) was numerically higher than in duloxetine patients (12.9%). Spontaneous reports of adverse events related to sexual function were infrequent and no patients discontinued due to these events. In patients with MDD, the probability of continued or emergent SD after up to 34 weeks of open-label duloxetine treatment was associated with the response status of the patients. In patients who responded to duloxetine treatment, after up to a further 52 weeks of double-blind treatment either with duloxetine or placebo, the probability of continued or emergent SD appeared to be more related to MDD itself than the treatments that the patients received.

Adjunctive lamotrigine XR for primary generalized tonic–clonic seizures in a randomized, placebo-controlled study

Efficacy and tolerability of once-daily adjunctive lamotrigine extended-release (XR) for primary generalized tonic–clonic (PGTC) seizures in epilepsy were evaluated. Patients ( n = 153) ≥ 13 years old diagnosed with epilepsy with PGTC seizures were randomized to once-daily adjunctive lamotrigine XR or placebo in a double-blind, parallel-group trial comprising a baseline phase, a 7-week double-blind escalation phase, and a 12-week double-blind maintenance phase. Lamotrigine XR was more effective than placebo with respect to median percentage reduction from baseline in weekly PGTC seizure frequency (primary endpoint—19-week treatment phase: 75.4% vs 32.1%, P < 0.0001; escalation phase: 61.9% vs 30.6%, P = 0.0016; maintenance phase: 89.7% vs 33.3%, P < 0.0001). Lamotrigine XR was more effective than placebo with respect to the percentage of patients with ≥ 50% reduction in PGTC seizure frequency. Significant separation from placebo for ≥ 50% reduction in PGTC seizures was observed beginning on treatment day 8. The most common adverse event was headache (lamotrigine XR 14%, placebo 16%).

Morphine/Naltrexone

Oral morphine/naltrexone extended release capsules comprise the selective mu-opioid receptor agonist morphine in a sustained-release formulation combined with a sequestered core of the mu-opioid receptor antagonist naltrexone for use in the management of moderate to severe pain. When morphine/naltrexone is taken as intended, naltrexone exerts no clinically significant effect. However, when the capsule contents are taken after being tampered with by crushing, chewing or dissolution, naltrexone is rapidly released and absorbed, thereby mitigating the effects of morphine. Morphine/naltrexone was effective in the treatment and management of moderate to severe chronic pain in patients with pain due to osteoarthritis of the hip or knee participating in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III study (n = 344). Changes in mean Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) average scores from baseline of the double-blind maintenance phase to 12 weeks were significantly better with morphine/naltrexone (20 mg/0.8 mg to 80 mg/3.2 mg twice daily) than with placebo. In a 12-month, open-label safety study, morphine/naltrexone also provided effective pain relief and sustained pain control in patients with chronic, moderate to severe, nonmalignant pain (n = 465 at baseline; 162 at study end). Furthermore, significant mean changes from baseline in BPI worst, least, average and current pain scores were seen from week 1 onwards. Morphine/naltrexone treatment was generally well tolerated in adult patients with chronic moderate to severe nonmalignant pain in clinical trials of up to 1-year duration.

Duloxetine 60 mg/day for the prevention of depressive recurrences:post hocanalyses from a recurrence prevention study

To assess the efficacy of duloxetine 60 mg/day in the prevention of depressive recurrence in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). Patients having at least three episodes of MDD in the past 5 years received open-label (OL) duloxetine 60-120 mg/day for up to 34 weeks. Patients meeting response criteria were then randomised to either duloxetine or placebo for up to 52 weeks of double-blind maintenance treatment. Only patients taking duloxetine 60 mg/day during the OL phase, and randomised to either duloxetine (remained on 60 mg/day dose) or placebo, were included in this post hoc analysis. The primary outcome measure was time to recurrence of a major depressive episode. The 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD(17)) was used to evaluate depressive symptomatology. Global and physical functioning and pain were also assessed. Safety and tolerability were assessed via analysis of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), vital signs and weight. A total of 124 patients were randomised to duloxetine 60 mg/day (n = 64) or placebo (n = 60). Time to depressive recurrence was significantly longer in duloxetine-treated patients compared with placebo-treated patients (p = 0.001). During the double-blind maintenance phase, 31.7% of placebo-treated patients experienced a depressive recurrence compared with 12.5% of duloxetine-treated patients (p = 0.004). The HAMD(17) total score and most of its subscales as well as the Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S), significantly worsened in the placebo group compared with the duloxetine 60 mg/day group. There were no significant differences between treatment groups in TEAEs, discontinuations because of adverse events, vital signs or weight. Treatment with duloxetine 60 mg/day was associated with a longer time to depressive recurrence and a significantly lower recurrence rate compared with placebo.

Pregabalin for painful HIV neuropathy

Pregabalin is effective in several neuropathic pain syndromes. This trial evaluated its efficacy, safety, and tolerability for treatment of painful HIV-associated neuropathy. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial included a 2-week double-blind dose-adjustment (150-600 mg/day BID) phase, a 12-week double-blind maintenance phase, and an optional 3-month open label extension phase. The primary efficacy measure was the mean Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) score, an 11-point numeric rating scale. Secondary measures included Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) and sleep measurements. Baseline mean NPRS score was 6.93 for patients randomized to pregabalin (n = 151) and 6.72 for those to placebo (n = 151). Pregabalin average daily dosage (SD) was 385.7 (160.3) mg/d. At endpoint, pregabalin and placebo showed substantial reductions in mean NPRS score from baseline: -2.88 vs -2.63, p = 0.3941. Pregabalin had greater improvements in NPRS score relative to placebo at weeks 1 (-1.14 vs -0.69, p = 0.0131) and 2 (-1.92 vs -1.43, p = 0.0393), and at weeks 7 (-3.22 vs -2.53 p = 0.0307) and 8 (-3.33 vs -2.53, p = 0.0156). At all other time points, differences between groups were not significant. Sleep measurements and 7-item PGIC did not differ among treatment groups; however, collapsed PGIC scores showed 82.8% of pregabalin and 66.7% of placebo patients rated themselves in 1 of the 3 "improved" categories (p = 0.0077). Somnolence and dizziness were the most common adverse events with pregabalin. Pregabalin was well-tolerated, but not superior to placebo in the treatment of painful HIV neuropathy. Factors predicting analgesic response in HIV neuropathy warrant additional research. This Class II trial showed that pregabalin is not more effective than placebo in treatment of painful HIV neuropathy.

Duloxetine in the Prevention of Depressive Recurrences

To assess the efficacy of duloxetine 60-120 mg once daily in the prevention of depressive recurrence in outpatients with recurrent major depressive disorder (MDD). Eligible patients with at least 3 episodes of MDD (DSM-IV diagnosis) in the past 5 years received open-label duloxetine 60-120 mg/day for up to 34 weeks. Patients meeting response criteria were then randomly assigned to either duloxetine or placebo for up to 52 weeks of double-blind maintenance treatment. The primary outcome measure was time to recurrence of a major depressive episode. Safety and tolerability were assessed via analysis of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), vital signs, weight, and laboratory measures. Patients were recruited from 43 study centers in 5 European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Russia, and Sweden) and the United States. The study was conducted from March 2005 to January 2008. A total of 288 patients were randomly assigned to duloxetine or placebo. Time to a depressive recurrence was significantly longer in duloxetine-treated patients compared with placebo-treated patients (p < .001). During the double-blind maintenance phase, 33.1% of placebo-treated patients experienced a depressive recurrence compared with 14.4% of duloxetine-treated patients (p < .001). There were no significant differences between treatment groups in TEAEs, discontinuations due to adverse events, vital signs, or weight. Treatment with duloxetine was associated with a longer time to depressive recurrence and a significantly lower recurrence rate compared with placebo. (ClinicalTrials.gov) Identifier: NCT00105989.