Analyses of Safety Profile and Homologous Antibody Responses to a Mammalian Cell-Based, MF59-Adjuvanted, A/H5N1, Pandemic Influenza Vaccine across Four Phase II/III Clinical Trials in Healthy Children, Adults, and Older Adults.

Modern cell culture-based technology eliminates vaccine manufactures reliance on embryonated chicken eggs, which may become compromised during an avian influenza pandemic. Four studies (total N = 6230) assessed the immunogenicity and safety of mammalian cell-based, MF59®-adjuvanted, A/H5N1 vaccine (aH5N1c; AUDENZ™) as two doses administered on Days 1 and 22 in children (NCT01776554), adults (NCT01776541; NCT02839330), and older adults (NCT01766921; NCT02839330). Immunogenicity of formulations at 7.5 µg and 3.75 µg antigen per dose were assessed by hemagglutination inhibition and microneutralization assays on Days 1, 22, 43, and 183 or 387. Solicited local and systemic adverse events (AEs) were recorded for 7 days after each vaccination. Unsolicited AEs were collected for 21 days after each vaccination, and serious and other selected AEs were recorded for one year. Antibody responses after two 7.5 µg doses met CBER licensure criteria in all age groups. Overall, an age-related response was evident, with the highest responses observed in children <3 years old. In children, antibody titers met seroconversion criteria 12 months after vaccination. MF59 allowed for antigen dose sparing. Solicited AEs were mild to moderate in nature, of short duration, and less frequent after the second dose than the first, demonstrating a favorable risk-benefit profile.

Post hoc analyses of East Asian patients from the randomized placebo-controlled PREVAIL trial of enzalutamide in patients with chemotherapy-naïve, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Enzalutamide is an androgen receptor (AR) inhibitor that acts on different steps in the AR signaling pathway. In PREVAIL, an international, phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, enzalutamide significantly reduced the risk of radiographic progression by 81% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.19; P < .0001) and reduced the risk of death by 29% (HR, 0.71; P < .0001) compared with placebo in chemotherapy-naïve men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHODS: To evaluate treatment effects, safety, and pharmacokinetics of enzalutamide in East Asian patients from the PREVAIL trial, we performed a post hoc analysis of the Japanese, Korean, and Singaporean patients. PREVAIL enrolled patients with asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who had progressed on androgen deprivation therapy. During the study, patients received enzalutamide (160 mg/d) or placebo (1:1) until death or discontinuation because of radiographic progression or skeletal-related event and initiation of subsequent therapy. Centrally assessed radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS) were coprimary endpoints. The secondary endpoints of the PREVAIL trial were investigator-assessed rPFS, time to initiation of chemotherapy, time to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression, and PSA response (≥50% decline). RESULTS: Of 1717 patients, 148 patients were enrolled at sites in East Asia (enzalutamide 73, placebo 75). Treatment effect of enzalutamide versus placebo was consistent with that for the overall population as indicated by the HRs (95% confidence interval) of 0.38 (0.10-1.44) for centrally assessed rPFS, 0.59 (0.29-1.23) for OS, 0.33 (0.19-0.60) for time to chemotherapy, and 0.32 (0.20-0.50) for time to PSA progression. In East Asian patients, PSA responses were observed in 68.5% and 14.7% of enzalutamide- and placebo-treated patients, respectively. The enzalutamide plasma concentration ratio (East Asian:non-Asian patients) was 1.12 (90% confidence interval, 1.05-1.20) at 13 weeks. Treatment-related adverse events grade ≥ 3 occurred in 1.4% and 2.7% of enzalutamide- and placebo-treated East Asian patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment effects and safety of enzalutamide in East Asian patients were generally consistent with those observed in the overall study population from PREVAIL. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV NUMBER: NCT01212991.

Enzalutamide in Men with Chemotherapy-naïve Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: Extended Analysis of the Phase 3 PREVAIL Study.

Enzalutamide significantly improved radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS) among men with chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer at the prespecified interim analysis of PREVAIL, a phase 3, double-blind, randomized study. We evaluated the longer-term efficacy and safety of enzalutamide up to the prespecified number of deaths in the final analysis, which included an additional 20 mo of follow-up for investigator-assessed rPFS, 9 mo of follow-up for OS, and 4 mo of follow-up for safety. Enzalutamide reduced the risk of radiographic progression or death by 68% (hazard ratio [HR] 0.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.28-0.37; p<0.0001) and the risk of death by 23% (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.67-0.88; p=0.0002). Median investigator-assessed rPFS was 20.0 mo (95% CI 18.9-22.1) in the enzalutamide arm and 5.4 mo (95% CI 4.1-5.6) in the placebo arm. Median OS was 35.3 mo (95% CI 32.2-not yet reached) in the enzalutamide arm and 31.3 mo (95% CI 28.8-34.2) in the placebo arm. At the time of the OS analysis, 167 patients in the placebo arm had crossed over to receive enzalutamide. The most common adverse events in the enzalutamide arm were fatigue, back pain, constipation, and arthralgia. This final analysis of PREVAIL provides more complete assessment of the clinical benefit of enzalutamide. PREVAIL is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT01212991. PATIENT SUMMARY: According to data from longer follow-up, enzalutamide continued to provide benefit over placebo in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

The PREVAIL trial of enzalutamide in men with chemotherapy-naïve, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: Post hoc analysis of Korean patients.

PURPOSE: This post hoc analysis evaluated treatment effects, safety, and pharmacokinetics of enzalutamide in Korean patients in the phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled PREVAIL trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic chemotherapy-naive men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer that progressed on androgen deprivation therapy received 160 mg/d oral enzalutamide or placebo (1:1) until death or discontinuation due to radiographic progression or skeletal-related event and initiation of subsequent therapy. Coprimary end points were centrally assessed radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included investigator-assessed rPFS, time to initiation of chemotherapy, time to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression, PSA response (≥50% decline), and time to skeletal-related event. RESULTS: Of 1,717 total patients, 78 patients were enrolled in Korea (enzalutamide, n=40; placebo, n=38). Hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) for enzalutamide versus placebo were 0.23 (0.02-2.24) for centrally assessed rPFS, 0.77 (0.28-2.15) for OS, 0.21 (0.08-0.51) for time to chemotherapy, and 0.31 (0.17-0.56) for time to PSA progression. A PSA response was observed in 70.0% of enzalutamide-treated and 10.5% of placebo-treated Korean patients. Adverse events of grade ≥3 occurred in 33% of enzalutamide-treated and 11% of placebo-treated Korean patients, with median treatment durations of 13.0 and 5.1 months, respectively. At 13 weeks, the plasma concentration of enzalutamide plus N-desmethyl enzalutamide was similar in Korean and non-Korean patients (geometric mean ratio, 1.04; 90% confidence interval, 0.97-1.10). CONCLUSIONS: In Korean patients, treatment effects and safety of enzalutamide were consistent with those observed in the overall PREVAIL study population (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01212991).

Enzalutamide in Japanese patients with chemotherapy-naïve, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: A post-hoc analysis of the placebo-controlled PREVAIL trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the treatment effects, safety and pharmacokinetics of enzalutamide in Japanese patients. METHODS: This was a post-hoc analysis of the phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled PREVAIL trial. Asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic chemotherapy-naïve patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer progressing on androgen deprivation therapy were randomized one-to-one to 160 mg/day oral enzalutamide or placebo until discontinuation on radiographic progression or skeletal-related event and initiation of subsequent antineoplastic therapy. Coprimary end-points were centrally assessed radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival. Secondary end-points were investigator-assessed radiographic progression-free survival, time to initiation of chemotherapy, time to prostate-specific antigen progression, prostate-specific antigen response (≥50% decline) and time to skeletal-related event. RESULTS: Of 1717 patients, 61 were enrolled in Japan (enzalutamide, n = 28; placebo, n = 33); hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) of 0.30 for centrally assessed radiographic progression-free survival (0.03-2.95), 0.59 for overall survival (0.20-1.8), 0.46 for time to chemotherapy (0.22-0.96) and 0.36 for time to prostate-specific antigen progression (0.17-0.75) showed the treatment benefit of enzalutamide over the placebo. Prostate-specific antigen responses were observed in 60.7% of enzalutamide-treated men versus 21.2% of placebo-treated men. Plasma concentrations of enzalutamide were higher in Japanese patients: the geometric mean ratio of Japanese/non-Japanese patients was 1.126 (90% confidence interval 1.018-1.245) at 13 weeks. Treatment-related adverse events grade ≥3 occurred in 3.6% of enzalutamide- and 6.1% of placebo-treated Japanese patients. CONCLUSION: Treatment effects and safety in Japanese patients were generally consistent with the overall results from PREVAIL.

Temporal stability of the Unified Dyskinesia Rating Scale.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to establish temporal stability characteristics for objective components of the Unified Dyskinesia Rating Scale (UDysRS). The UDysRS has strong internal consistency and a reliable factor structure, but the important issue of temporal stability has not been established. METHODS: Using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) analyses, we examined UDysRS temporal stability for the objective scale components (Part III and IV) over an 8-hour observation period. We assessed ICCs for the single centralized rater, the on-site raters, and the agreement between the single centralized rater and the on-site raters. Kappa statistic assessed agreement between the single centralized and on-site raters for clinical state (ON vs OFF). RESULTS: For both the single centralized rater and the on-site raters, there was high temporal stability of the UDysRS Part III, Part IV, and Total Objective UDysRS in both ON and OFF states, with ICCs ranging from 0.822 (P < .0005) to 0.513 (P < .013). The agreement between the 2 rating techniques (centralized vs on-site) was significant for ON and OFF ratings of Part III, Part IV, and Total Objective UDysRS, ranging from 0.821 (P < .0005) to 0.703 (P < .0005). CONCLUSIONS: The UDysRS is highly stable for ON and OFF. Our data suggest that a single UDysRS evaluation for ON and for OFF states is highly representative of that state regardless of time. Likewise, if appropriate protocols need to assess dyskinesia in a field or community setting, the UDysRS can be filmed without an on-site rater and rated centrally with retained validity.

Double-blind study of pardoprunox, a new partial dopamine agonist, in early Parkinson's disease.

This study examined the efficacy and safety of the partial dopamine agonist, pardoprunox (SLV308), in the treatment of patients with early Parkinson's disease (PD). Patients were randomized to receive pardoprunox (n = 69) or placebo (n = 70). Pardoprunox was titrated to each patient's optimal dose (9-45 mg/d) over 2 to 6 weeks and then maintained at this dose for a further 3 weeks. Concomitant anti-Parkinson treatment was not permitted. In the primary analysis, Unified PD Rating Scale (UPDRS)-Motor score was improved in pardoprunox-treated patients (overall mean dose 23.8 mg/d; -7.3 points), as compared with placebo (-3.0 points; P = 0.0001), from baseline to end point. At end point, there were more responders (> or = 30% reduction in UPDRS-Motor score) in the pardoprunox group (50.7%) than in the placebo group (15.7%; P < 0.0001). In other secondary analyses, UPDRS-activities of daily living (ADL) and -ADL+Motor scores were also significantly more improved in the pardoprunox group. Nausea was reported by 32 of 68 (47.1%) pardoprunox-treated patients (vs. 3/70, 4.3%, placebo-treated patients), with dizziness, somnolence, headache, and asthenia also reported by > or = 10 patients. In this exploratory proof-of-concept study, pardoprunox significantly improved motor function in patients with early PD. The efficacy and safety profile of pardoprunox justifies its further investigation in PD.

Effects of betahistine on patient-reported outcomes in routine practice in patients with vestibular vertigo and appraisal of tolerability: experience in the OSVaLD study.

This was a 3-month multicentre, open-label post-marketing surveillance study of betahistine (24 mg b.i.d. or 16 mg t.i.d.) in patients with vertigo of peripheral vestibular origin. Study endpoints comprised on-treatment changes in the Dizziness Handicap Index (DHI), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score (HADS) and the Short-Form (SF)-36v2. Total DHI score improved 37.2 points (of a 100-point scale) following betahistine treatment. Corresponding improvements occurred in all three DHI scale domains (all p < 0.001 vs baseline). Betahistine therapy was also accompanied by progressive, significant improvements in both HADS-A and HADS-D scores (p < 0.001), and improvements in the distribution profiles of anxiety and depression scores. Significant improvements in the Physical Component Summary and Mental Component Summary scores of the SF-36v2 were recorded during betahistine treatment. Betahistine was generally well tolerated. A total of 76 adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were recorded in 49 patients (2.4%), of which 75 were classified as mild or moderate and 54 were possibly related to betahistine. ADRs led to study drug discontinuation in 17 patients. These data illustrate that treatment with betahistine 48 mg/day in patients with recurrent peripheral vestibular vertigo is associated with improvements in objective measures of health-related quality of life and satisfactory tolerability.