Apraglutide, a novel once-weekly glucagon-like peptide-2 analog, improves intestinal fluid and energy absorption in patients with short bowel syndrome: An open-label phase 1 and 2 metabolic balance trial.

BACKGROUND: Apraglutide is a novel long-acting glucagon-like peptide-2 (GLP-2) analog designed for once-weekly subcutaneous dosing, with the potential to increase fluid and nutrient absorption by the remnant intestine of patients who have short bowel syndrome (SBS) with intestinal insufficiency (SBS-II) or intestinal failure (SBS-IF). This trial investigated the safety and effects on intestinal absorption of apraglutide in patients with SBS-II and SBS-IF. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 1 and 2 trial, adult patients with SBS-II (n = 4) or SBS-IF (n = 4) and a fecal output of ≥1500 g/day received once-weekly subcutaneous 5 mg apraglutide for 4 weeks. Safety was the primary end point. Secondary end points included change from baseline in intestinal absorption of wet weight (indicative of fluid absorption), electrolytes, and energy (by bomb calorimetry) measured by inpatient metabolic balance studies. RESULTS: Common treatment-related adverse events were decreased gastrointestinal (GI) stoma output (n = 6), stoma complications (n = 6), GI stoma complications (n = 5), nausea (n = 5), flatulence (n = 4), abnormal GI stoma output (n = 4), polyuria (n = 3), and abdominal pain (n = 3). The only treatment-related serious adverse event (experienced in one patient) was abdominal pain. Apraglutide significantly increased wet weight and energy absorption by an adjusted mean of 741 g/day (95% CI, 194 to 1287; P = 0.015) and 1095 kJ/day (95% CI, 196 to 1994; P = 0.024), respectively. Sodium and potassium absorption significantly increased by an adjusted mean of 38 mmol/day (95% CI, 3 to 74; P = 0.039) and 18 mmol/day (95% CI, 4 to 32; P = 0.020), respectively. CONCLUSION: Once-weekly 5 mg apraglutide was well tolerated in patients with SBS-II and SBS-IF and significantly improved the absorption of fluids, electrolytes, and energy.

Apraglutide, a novel glucagon-like peptide-2 analog, improves fluid absorption in patients with short bowel syndrome intestinal failure: Findings from a placebo-controlled, randomized phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment with glucagon-like peptide-2 (GLP-2) analogs improve intestinal adaptation in patients with short bowel syndrome-associated intestinal failure (SBS-IF) and may reduce parenteral support requirements. Apraglutide is a novel, long-acting GLP-2 analog designed for once-weekly dosing. This trial investigated the safety and efficacy of apraglutide in patients with SBS-IF. METHODS: In this placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized, crossover phase 2 trial, eight adults with SBS-IF were treated with once-weekly 5-mg apraglutide doses and placebo for 4 weeks, followed by once-weekly 10-mg apraglutide doses for 4 weeks, with a washout period of 6-10 weeks between treatments. Safety was the primary end point. Secondary end points included changes from baseline in urine volume output compared with placebo, collected for 48 h before and after each treatment period. RESULTS: Common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were mild to moderate and included polyuria, decreased stoma output, stoma complications, decreased thirst, and edema. No serious AEs were considered to be related to apraglutide treatment. The safety profile was comparable for the lower and higher doses. Treatment with once-weekly 5- and 10-mg apraglutide doses significantly increased urine volume output by an adjusted mean of 714 ml/day (95% CI, 490-939; P < .05) and 795 ml/day (95% CI, 195-1394; P < .05), respectively, compared with placebo, with no significant differences between doses. CONCLUSIONS: Once-weekly apraglutide was well tolerated at both tested doses and significantly increased urine volume output, providing evidence for increased intestinal fluid absorption. A phase 3 trial is underway in adults with SBS-IF.

Drop-out rates in placebo-controlled trials of antidepressant drugs: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on clinical study reports.

OBJECTIVE: To study the drop-out rates in trials of selective serotonin and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs and SNRIs). METHODS: This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of trials. The main outcome measure: Overall drop-out rate. Secondary outcomes were drop-outs due to adverse events and lack of effect. We obtained clinical study reports (CSRs) of five antidepressant drugs from the European Medicines Agency and the UK's Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. The eligibility criteria for selecting studies: double-blind randomised, placebo-controlled trials for any indication. DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS: The primary outcome was extracted by two researchers independently and meta-analysed using the Mantel-Haenszel method (fixed effect model). The secondary outcomes were extracted by one researcher and checked by another. Sensitivity analyses were performed using Peto's odds ratio and beta binomial methods, due to presence of null events, and by excluding unreliable trials. RESULTS: We included 71 CSRs (67,319 pages) with information on 73 trials (11,057 patients on SSRI or SNRI drugs, and 7,369 on placebo). There were minor discrepancies within the CSRs when a modified intention to treat principle was used and patients lost to follow up early in the trial were not accounted for. Significantly more patients dropped out on active drug than on placebo, risk ratio 1.08 (95% CI 1.03 to 1.13), with no difference between adults and children/ adolescents, RR = 1.08 (1.03 to 1.13) and 1.07 (0.95 to 1.21), respectively. When three trials with a prior single-blind phase on active drug were removed, the difference was a risk ratio of 1.12 (1.07 to 1.18), whereas the result was the same after removal of three trials with fraudulent data or other issues with data validity, risk ratio 1.08 (1.03 to 1.13). There were more drop-outs due to adverse events on active drug than on placebo, risk ratio 2.63 (2.33 to 2.96). There were fewer drop-outs due to lack of effect, risk ratio 0.47 (0.43 to 0.53). However, this result is biased; when more people drop out due to adverse effects, fewer can drop out because of lack of effect. CONCLUSIONS: By using CSRs, we were able to demonstrate for the first time that more patients dropped out on active drug than on placebo. As it can be argued that the drop-out rate reflects the patients' overall assessment of the balance between benefits and harms, our review adds to the growing concern that SSRIs and SNRIs might not have the desired effect. Our review also highlights the importance of using CSRs for undertaking reviews of drugs.

Compliance with Guidelines on Thromboprophylaxis for Acutely Admitted Medical Patients.

INTRODUCTION: The risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is increased by more than 100-fold among hospitalised medical patients compared to subjects in the community. The Danish Council for the Use of Expensive Hospital Medicines has published national guidelines on thromboprophylaxis (TP) in which the risks of VTE and bleeding are balanced. We wanted to investigate the proportion of acutely admitted medical patients for whom thromboprophylaxis was indicated and to what extent the guidelines were followed. METHODS: Data from patients hospitalised at two medical wards were screened. We registered the proportion of patients for whom mechanical or pharmacologic TP (MTP and PTP, respectively) was indicated and whether national guidelines were followed. All data extraction and analyses were performed retrospectively. RESULTS: After exclusion criteria were applied, 340 cases remained. PTP was indicated in 26 patients (7.6%) but only 4 patients were treated besides 12 patients who were already in anticoagulant treatment at submission. Conversely, 8/306 patients, in whom TP was not indicated, were started on PTP. MTP was indicated in 8/340 patients (2.4%) but therapy was not initiated in any of them. The majority (320/340, 94.1%) of cases was managed in accordance with existing guidelines. However, this high proportion was mainly explained by the large number of untreated patients, where TP was not indicated. CONCLUSION: A large proportion of hospitalised medical patients was managed in conflict with national guidelines. A systematic approach to TP in patients with acute medical illness should be implemented. Plain language summary available for this article.

Suicidality and aggression during antidepressant treatment: systematic review and meta-analyses based on clinical study reports.

OBJECTIVE: To study serious harms associated with selective serotonin and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors.Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mortality and suicidality. Secondary outcomes were aggressive behaviour and akathisia. DATA SOURCES: Clinical study reports for duloxetine, fluoxetine, paroxetine, sertraline, and venlafaxine obtained from the European and UK drug regulators, and summary trial reports for duloxetine and fluoxetine from Eli Lilly's website. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION: Double blind placebo controlled trials that contained any patient narratives or individual patient listings of harms. DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS: Two researchers extracted data independently; the outcomes were meta-analysed by Peto's exact method (fixed effect model). RESULTS: We included 70 trials (64,381 pages of clinical study reports) with 18,526 patients. These trials had limitations in the study design and discrepancies in reporting, which may have led to serious under-reporting of harms. For example, some outcomes appeared only in individual patient listings in appendices, which we had for only 32 trials, and we did not have case report forms for any of the trials. Differences in mortality (all deaths were in adults, odds ratio 1.28, 95% confidence interval 0.40 to 4.06), suicidality (1.21, 0.84 to 1.74), and akathisia (2.04, 0.93 to 4.48) were not significant, whereas patients taking antidepressants displayed more aggressive behaviour (1.93, 1.26 to 2.95). For adults, the odds ratios were 0.81 (0.51 to 1.28) for suicidality, 1.09 (0.55 to 2.14) for aggression, and 2.00 (0.79 to 5.04) for akathisia. The corresponding values for children and adolescents were 2.39 (1.31 to 4.33), 2.79 (1.62 to 4.81), and 2.15 (0.48 to 9.65). In the summary trial reports on Eli Lilly's website, almost all deaths were noted, but all suicidal ideation events were missing, and the information on the remaining outcomes was incomplete. CONCLUSIONS: Because of the shortcomings identified and having only partial access to appendices with no access to case report forms, the harms could not be estimated accurately. In adults there was no significant increase in all four outcomes, but in children and adolescents the risk of suicidality and aggression doubled. To elucidate the harms reliably, access to anonymised individual patient data is needed.