Efficacy and safety of selexipag in patients with inoperable or persistent/recurrent CTEPH (SELECT randomised trial).

BACKGROUND: SELECT was the first global randomised controlled trial of selexipag with standard of care in patients with inoperable or persistent/recurrent chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension. METHODS: SELECT was a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, group-sequential, phase 3 study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03689244). Adults aged ≤85 years in World Health Organization Functional Class I-IV, with a 6-min walk distance of 100-450 m, were randomised (1:1) to receive selexipag (200-1600 µg twice daily titration until individual maximum tolerated dose)+standard of care or placebo+standard of care. Patients were recruited into the haemodynamic set (first 91 randomised patients to undergo right heart catheterisation (RHC); week 20) or non-haemodynamic cohort (remaining patients, no RHC required). The primary end-point was percent of baseline pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR; week 20). Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: Of 321 patients screened, 128 were randomised (haemodynamic set n=91 (selexipag n=47; placebo n=44)). In the haemodynamic set, 29 (31.9%) patients had previous pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA), 20 (22.0%) balloon pulmonary angioplasty (BPA), and 14 (15.4%) both PEA and BPA; 28 (30.8%) were inoperable. The independent data monitoring committee recommended to stop the study for futility as no statistically significant difference was observed for the primary end-point (between-treatment geometric least squares mean ratio of PVR: 0.95, 95% CI 0.84-1.07; p=0.412). Adverse events were reported in 63 (98.4%) and 53 (82.8%) patients for selexipag and placebo, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: SELECT was discontinued for futility, as no treatment effect on the primary end-point (PVR) was observed. Safety data were consistent with the established safety profile of selexipag, with no new safety signals identified.

Macitentan for the treatment of inoperable chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (MERIT-1): results from the multicentre, phase 2, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Macitentan is beneficial for long-term treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension. The microvasculopathy of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) and pulmonary arterial hypertension are similar. METHODS: The phase 2, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled MERIT-1 trial assessed macitentan in 80 patients with CTEPH adjudicated as inoperable. Patients identified as WHO functional class II-IV with a pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) of at least 400 dyn·s/cm5 and a walk distance of 150-450 m in 6 min were randomly assigned (1:1), via an interactive voice/web response system, to receive oral macitentan (10 mg once a day) or placebo. Treatment with phosphodiesterase type-5 inhibitors and oral or inhaled prostanoids was permitted for WHO functional class III/IV patients. The primary endpoint was resting PVR at week 16, expressed as percentage of PVR measured at baseline. Analyses were done in all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment; safety analyses were done in all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02021292. FINDINGS: Between April 3, 2014, and March 17, 2016, we screened 186 patients for eligibility at 48 hospitals across 20 countries. Of these, 80 patients in 36 hospitals were randomly assigned to treatment (40 patients to macitentan, 40 patients to placebo). At week 16, geometric mean PVR decreased to 71·5% of baseline in the macitentan group and to 87·6% in the placebo group (geometric means ratio 0·81, 95% CI 0·70-0·95, p=0·0098). The most common adverse events in the macitentan group were peripheral oedema (9 [23%] of 40 patients) and decreased haemoglobin (6 [15%]). INTERPRETATION: In MERIT-1, macitentan significantly improved PVR in patients with inoperable CTEPH and was well tolerated. FUNDING: Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd.

Multiple In-Mold Sensors for Quality and Process Control in Injection Molding.

The simultaneous improvement of injection molding process efficiency and product quality, as required by Industry 4.0, is a complex, non-trivial task that requires a comprehensive approach, which involves a combination of sensoring and information techniques. In this study, we investigated the suitability of in-mold pressure sensors to control the injection molding process in multi-cavity molds. We have conducted several experiments to show how to optimize the clamping force, switchover, or holding time by measuring only pressure in a multi-cavity mold. The results show that the pressure curves and the pressure integral are suitable for determining optimal clamping force. We also proved that in-channel sensors could be effectively used for a pressure-controlled SWOP. In the volume-controlled method, only the sensors in the cavity were capable of correctly detecting the end of the filling. We proposed a method to optimize the holding phase. In this method, we first determined the integration time of the area under the pressure curve and then performed a model fit using the relationship between the pressure integral and product mass. The saturation curve fitted to the pressure data can easily determine the gate freeze-off time from pressure measurements.

Machine Learning in Injection Molding: An Industry 4.0 Method of Quality Prediction.

One of the essential requirements of injection molding is to ensure the stable quality of the parts produced. However, numerous processing conditions, which are often interrelated in quite a complex way, make this challenging. Machine learning (ML) algorithms can be the solution, as they work in multidimensional spaces by learning the structure of datasets. In this study, we used four ML algorithms (kNN, naïve Bayes, linear discriminant analysis, and decision tree) and compared their effectiveness in predicting the quality of multi-cavity injection molding. We used pressure-based quality indexes (features) as inputs for the classification algorithms. We proved that all the examined ML algorithms adequately predict quality in injection molding even with very little training data. We found that the decision tree algorithm was the most accurate one, with a computational time of only 8-10 s. The average performance of the decision tree algorithm exceeded 90%, even for very little training data. We also demonstrated that feature selection does not significantly affect the accuracy of the decision tree algorithm.

Macitentan for the treatment of inoperable chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (MERIT-1): results from the multicentre, phase 2, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Macitentan is beneficial for long-term treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension. The microvasculopathy of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) and pulmonary arterial hypertension are similar. METHODS: The phase 2, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled MERIT-1 trial assessed macitentan in 80 patients with CTEPH adjudicated as inoperable. Patients identified as WHO functional class II-IV with a pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) of at least 400 dyn·s/cm5 and a walk distance of 150-450 m in 6 min were randomly assigned (1:1), via an interactive voice/web response system, to receive oral macitentan (10 mg once a day) or placebo. Treatment with phosphodiesterase type-5 inhibitors and oral or inhaled prostanoids was permitted for WHO functional class III/IV patients. The primary endpoint was resting PVR at week 16, expressed as percentage of PVR measured at baseline. Analyses were done in all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment; safety analyses were done in all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02021292. FINDINGS: Between April 3, 2014, and March 17, 2016, we screened 186 patients for eligibility at 48 hospitals across 20 countries. Of these, 80 patients in 36 hospitals were randomly assigned to treatment (40 patients to macitentan, 40 patients to placebo). At week 16, geometric mean PVR decreased to 73·0% of baseline in the macitentan group and to 87·2% in the placebo group (geometric means ratio 0·84, 95% CI 0·70-0·99, p=0·041). The most common adverse events in the macitentan group were peripheral oedema (9 [23%] of 40 patients) and decreased haemoglobin (6 [15%]). INTERPRETATION: In MERIT-1, macitentan significantly improved PVR in patients with inoperable CTEPH and was well tolerated. FUNDING: Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd.

Canakinumab for acute gouty arthritis in patients with limited treatment options: results from two randomised, multicentre, active-controlled, double-blind trials and their initial extensions.

OBJECTIVES: Gouty arthritis patients for whom non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and colchicine are inappropriate have limited treatment options. Canakinumab, an anti-interleukin-1ß monoclonal antibody, may be an option for such patients. The authors assessed the efficacy/safety of one dose of canakinumab 150 mg (n=230) or triamcinolone acetonide (TA) 40 mg (n=226) at baseline and upon a new flare in frequently flaring patients contraindicated for, intolerant of, or unresponsive to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and/or colchicine. Core study co-primary endpoints were pain intensity 72 h postdose (0-100 mm visual analogue scale and time to first new flare. METHODS: Two 12-week randomised, multicentre, active-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group core studies with double-blind 12-week extensions (response in acute flare and in prevention of episodes of re-flare in gout (ß-RELIEVED and ß-RELIEVED-II)). RESULTS: 82.6% patients had comorbidities. Mean 72-h visual analogue scale pain score was lower with canakinumab (25.0 mm vs 35.7 mm; difference, -10.7 mm; 95% CI -15.4 to -6.0; p<0.0001), with significantly less physician-assessed tenderness and swelling (ORs=2.16 and 2.74; both p≤0.01) versus TA. Canakinumab significantly delayed time to first new flare, reduced the risk of new flares by 62% versus TA (HR: 0.38; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.57) in the core studies and by 56% (HR: 0.44; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.60; both p≤0.0001) over the entire 24-week period, and decreased median C-reactive protein levels (p≤0.0001 at 72 h and 7 days). Over the 24-week period, adverse events were reported in 66.2% (canakinumab) and 52.8% (TA) and serious adverse events were reported in 8.0% (canakinumab) and 3.5% (TA) of patients. Adverse events reported more frequently with canakinumab included infections, low neutrophil count and low platelet count. CONCLUSION: Canakinumab provided significant pain and inflammation relief and reduced the risk of new flares in these patients with acute gouty arthritis.

Canakinumab relieves symptoms of acute flares and improves health-related quality of life in patients with difficult-to-treat Gouty Arthritis by suppressing inflammation: results of a randomized, dose-ranging study.

INTRODUCTION: We report the impact of canakinumab, a fully human anti-interleukin-1ß monoclonal antibody, on inflammation and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with difficult-to-treat Gouty Arthritis. METHODS: In this eight-week, single-blind, double-dummy, dose-ranging study, patients with acute Gouty Arthritis flares who were unresponsive or intolerant to--or had contraindications for--non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and/or colchicine were randomized to receive a single subcutaneous dose of canakinumab (10, 25, 50, 90, or 150 mg) (N = 143) or an intramuscular dose of triamcinolone acetonide 40 mg (N = 57). Patients assessed pain using a Likert scale, physicians assessed clinical signs of joint inflammation, and HRQoL was measured using the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) (acute version). RESULTS: At baseline, 98% of patients were suffering from moderate-to-extreme pain. The percentage of patients with no or mild pain was numerically greater in most canakinumab groups compared with triamcinolone acetonide from 24 to 72 hours post-dose; the difference was statistically significant for canakinumab 150 mg at these time points (P < 0.05). Treatment with canakinumab 150 mg was associated with statistically significant lower Likert scores for tenderness (odds ratio (OR), 3.2; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.27 to 7.89; P = 0.014) and swelling (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.09 to 6.50, P = 0.032) at 72 hours compared with triamcinolone acetonide. Median C-reactive protein and serum amyloid A levels were normalized by seven days post-dose in most canakinumab groups, but remained elevated in the triamcinolone acetonide group. Improvements in physical health were observed at seven days post-dose in all treatment groups; increases in scores were highest for canakinumab 150 mg. In this group, the mean SF-36 physical component summary score increased by 12.0 points from baseline to 48.3 at seven days post-dose. SF-36 scores for physical functioning and bodily pain for the canakinumab 150 mg group approached those for the US general population by seven days post-dose and reached norm values by eight weeks post-dose. CONCLUSIONS: Canakinumab 150 mg provided significantly greater and more rapid reduction in pain and signs and symptoms of inflammation compared with triamcinolone acetonide 40 mg. Improvements in HRQoL were seen in both treatment groups with a faster onset with canakinumab 150 mg compared with triamcinolone acetonide 40 mg. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00798369.

Canakinumab for the treatment of acute flares in difficult-to-treat gouty arthritis: Results of a multicenter, phase II, dose-ranging study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of canakinumab, a fully human anti-interleukin-1ß monoclonal antibody, for the treatment of acute gouty arthritis. METHODS: In this 8-week, single-blind, double-dummy, dose-ranging study, patients with acute gouty arthritis whose disease was refractory to or who had contraindications to nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and/or colchicine were randomized to receive a single subcutaneous dose of canakinumab (10, 25, 50, 90, or 150 mg; n = 143) or an intramuscular dose of triamcinolone acetonide (40 mg; n = 57). Patients assessed pain using a 100-mm visual analog scale. RESULTS: Seventy-two hours after treatment, a statistically significant dose response was observed for canakinumab. All canakinumab doses were associated with numerically less pain than triamcinolone acetonide; thus, a dose with equivalent efficacy to triamcinolone acetonide 72 hours after treatment could not be determined. The reduction from baseline in pain intensity with canakinumab 150 mg was greater than with triamcinolone acetonide 24, 48, and 72 hours after treatment (differences of -11.5 mm [P = 0.04], -18.2 mm [P = 0.002], and -19.2 mm [P < 0.001], respectively), and 4, 5, and 7 days after treatment (all P < 0.05). Canakinumab significantly reduced the risk of recurrent flares versus triamcinolone acetonide (P ≤ 0.01 for all doses) (relative risk reduction 94% for canakinumab 150 mg versus triamcinolone acetonide). The overall incidence of adverse events was similar for canakinumab (41%) and triamcinolone acetonide (42%); most were mild or moderate in severity. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that canakinumab 150 mg provides rapid and sustained pain relief in patients with acute gouty arthritis, and significantly reduces the risk of recurrent flares compared with triamcinolone acetonide.

Effect on blood pressure of lumiracoxib versus ibuprofen in patients with osteoarthritis and controlled hypertension: a randomized trial.

OBJECTIVES: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs vary in their impact on blood pressure and the effect of lumiracoxib 100 mg once daily has not been studied previously. To examine whether lumiracoxib 100 mg once daily would result in lower 24-h mean systolic ambulatory blood pressure than ibuprofen 600 mg three times daily in osteoarthritis patients with controlled hypertension, a 4-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study was conducted in 79 centres in nine countries. METHODS: Hypertensive osteoarthritis patients of 50 years at least whose office blood pressure was less than 140/90 mmHg on stable antihypertensive treatment were randomized to lumiracoxib (n = 394) 100 mg once daily or ibuprofen 600 mg three times daily (n = 393) and 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was performed at baseline and end of study. The primary outcome measure was a comparison of the change in 24-h mean systolic ambulatory blood pressure from baseline to week 4. Secondary analyses included other blood pressure-related endpoints and efficacy (pain) measurements. RESULTS: Compared with baseline, the 24-h mean systolic ambulatory blood pressure (least square mean) decreased in lumiracoxib-treated patients (-2.7 mmHg) and increased in ibuprofen-treated patients (+2.2 mmHg) at 4 weeks, estimated difference -5.0 mmHg (95% confidence interval -6.1 to -3.8) in favour of lumiracoxib. The 24-h mean diastolic ambulatory blood pressure changes were -1.5 mmHg (lumiracoxib), +0.5 mmHg (ibuprofen), difference -2.0 mmHg (95% confidence interval -2.7 to -1.3). Efficacy results were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with lumiracoxib 100 mg once daily resulted in clinically significant lower blood pressure compared with ibuprofen 600 mg three times daily in osteoarthritis patients with well controlled hypertension.

Effect of risk factors on complicated and uncomplicated ulcers in the TARGET lumiracoxib outcomes study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors were developed to reduce the gastrointestinal risk associated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). The Therapeutic Arthritis Research and Gastrointestinal Event Trial was the largest study to evaluate primarily the gastrointestinal safety outcomes of selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors. Data from the Therapeutic Arthritis Research and Gastrointestinal Event Trial were used to identify risk factors and investigate the safety of lumiracoxib in subgroups. METHODS: Patients with osteoarthritis (age, >or=50 y) were randomized to receive lumiracoxib 400 mg once daily, naproxen 500 mg twice daily, or ibuprofen 800 mg 3 times daily for 12 months. Events were categorized by a blinded adjudication committee. The primary end point was all definite or probable ulcer complications. RESULTS: For patients taking NSAIDs, factors associated with an increased risk of ulcer complications were age 65 years or older (hazard ratio [HR], 2.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.48-3.59), previous history of gastrointestinal bleed or ulcer (HR, 3.61; 95% CI, 1.86-7.00), non-Caucasian racial origin (HR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.35-3.27), and male sex (HR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.08-2.68). With lumiracoxib, significant risk factors were age 65 years or older (HR, 3.18; 95% CI, 1.40-7.20), male sex (HR, 2.60; 95% CI, 1.25-5.40), non-Caucasian racial origin (HR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.02-4.59), and concomitant aspirin use (HR, 2.89; 95% CI, 1.40-5.97). Increased risks in patients age 65 years and older were increased further if other risk factors were present. Lumiracoxib maintained an advantage over NSAIDs across all subgroups except aspirin use. CONCLUSIONS: Lumiracoxib was associated with a reduced risk of ulcer complications compared with NSAIDs in all significant subgroups except aspirin users.

Gastrointestinal tolerability of lumiracoxib in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the gastrointestinal safety of lumiracoxib, a novel selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor. METHODS: Results from 15 Phase II and III randomized studies of lumiracoxib in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis were pooled. Patients received lumiracoxib (200/400 mg/day), celecoxib (200/400 mg/day), rofecoxib (25 mg once daily), diclofenac (75 mg twice daily), ibuprofen (800 mg 3 times daily), naproxen (500 mg twice daily), or placebo. Outcome measures included the incidence of definite or probable ulcer complications (perforations, obstructions, or bleedings as confirmed by an adjudication committee) and symptomatic upper gastrointestinal ulcers, the incidence of prespecified gastrointestinal adverse events, and the discontinuation rate caused by adverse events. All suspected ulcer complications in these 15 studies were adjudicated prospectively. Data from 2 endoscopic studies were pooled separately to assess the cumulative incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers >or=3 mm in diameter. RESULTS: Symptomatic upper gastrointestinal ulcers and ulcer complications were reduced nearly 10-fold with lumiracoxib (1.7 events per 100 patient-years [95% confidence interval, 1.09-2.39]) compared with nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (13.7 events per 100 patient-years [95% confidence interval, 9.47-18.82]). Symptomatic ulcer frequency was markedly lower with lumiracoxib (0.4%) than with nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (2.5%). Discontinuation rates due to gastrointestinal adverse events were higher for nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (8.4%) than for lumiracoxib (3.3%). In the endoscopy analysis, the cumulative frequency of ulcers >or=3 mm in diameter was reduced by >70% for lumiracoxib versus ibuprofen. CONCLUSIONS: Lumiracoxib exhibited a gastrointestinal safety profile superior to nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.