Pharmacokinetic Assessment and Treatment Effect of Lusutrombopag in Child-Pugh Class C Patients: Review of Patient Data from Two Clinical Studies and Post-Marketing Surveillance.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with thrombocytopenia and chronic liver disease are at increased risk of bleeding during invasive procedures due to low platelet counts. Lusutrombopag, an orally active thrombopoietin receptor agonist, increases platelet count and reduces the need for platelet transfusion in chronic liver disease patients with thrombocytopenia undergoing a planned invasive procedure. The safety of lusutrombopag in patients with Child-Pugh class C chronic liver disease is not known. The present analysis was performed to determine the pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety of lusutrombopag in patients with Child-Pugh class C chronic liver disease. METHODS: Data for patients with Child-Pugh class C chronic liver disease were collected from three data sets: a phase 1/2 Child-Pugh class C study (n = 5) (JapicCTI-163289 [Japan Pharmaceutical Information Center]), a phase 3 pivotal study (L-PLUS 2, n = 3) (NCT02389621 [Clinicaltrials.gov]), and ongoing post-marketing surveillance (n = 27) (JapicCTI-163432 [Japan Pharmaceutical Information Center]). Patients received lusutrombopag at 3 mg for up to 7 days. Safety and efficacy assessments were collected from two clinical studies and the post-marketing surveillance; pharmacokinetic data were collected from the phase 1/2 study. RESULTS: Mean Cmax and AUC0-τ were lower in Child-Pugh class C patients than Child-Pugh class A and B; individual patients' Cmax and AUC0-τ values overlapped among Child-Pugh classes. In lusutrombopag patients who did not receive platelet transfusion (n = 4 in phase 1/2, n = 1 in phase 3, n = 24 in post-marketing surveillance), the median (range) maximum platelet count was 88.5 × 109/L (54-105 × 109/L), 80 × 109/L, and 91 × 109/L (41-186 × 109/L; n = 23), respectively. There were no treatment-related adverse events or treatment-related serious adverse events. One patient from the phase 1/2 study had a non-serious portal vein thrombosis, which was not considered treatment-related. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis presented in this study suggests that lusutrombopag increases platelet counts in Child-Pugh class C patients and is safe and well tolerated in this patient population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: L-PLUS 2: NCT02389621 (Clinicaltrials.gov). Phase 1/2: JapicCTI-163289 (Japan Pharmaceutical Information Center [JAPIC]). Post-marketing surveillance: JapicCTI-163432 (JAPIC).

Efficacy and Safety of Duloxetine in Children and Adolescents with Major Depressive Disorder in Japan: A Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial Followed by an Open-Label Long-Term Extension Trial.

Objective: The goal of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of duloxetine in children and adolescents (9-17 years of age) with major depressive disorder (MDD) in Japan. Methods: This study consists of two clinical trials. First, a 6-week, randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial (RCT) was conducted. The primary endpoint of RCT was the change in Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) total scores from baseline. Following RCT, an open-label long-term extension trial (OLE) was conducted to investigate the longer-term safety of duloxetine for ∼1 year. Results: In RCT, CDRS-R total score changes from baseline to 6 weeks after the start of administration (primary endpoint) were -21.03 in the duloxetine group (n = 74) and -22.42 in the placebo group (n = 74). No significant difference was observed in the primary endpoint between the groups (p = 0.5587). In addition, no significant difference was observed in secondary endpoints such as CDRS-R response rates. The proportion of patients with ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) in RCT was significantly higher in the duloxetine group (78.7%) than in the placebo group (62.2%), and most were mild or moderate in severity. Changes in CDRS-R total scores during OLE, in consecutive patients from the duloxetine group in RCT (n = 63), or placebo group (n = 59) in RCT, and newly enrolled patients (n = 28), were -12.1, -11.3, and -17.8, respectively. The proportion of patients with ≥1 TEAE in OLE was 90.5%, 88.1%, and 89.3% in the respective groups, and most of them were mild or moderate in severity. Conclusions: Duloxetine did not show superiority to placebo in efficacy in children and adolescents with MDD in Japan. Overall reported TEAEs were consistent with the currently available duloxetine safety profile and no new safety finding was observed in the two clinical trials.

Efficacy of duloxetine in patients with knee osteoarthritis or chronic low back pain with early pain reduction: An exploratory post-hoc analysis of Japanese phase 3, 1-year extension studies.

BACKGROUND: Two previous phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials showed that duloxetine 60 mg/day for 14 weeks significantly improved pain and quality of life in Japanese patients with knee osteoarthritis or chronic low back pain. In their open-label extension studies, these improvements were maintained for ≥48 weeks. This post-hoc analysis assessed the relationship between initial response to duloxetine and long-term pain reduction and quality of life in patients with knee osteoarthritis or chronic low back pain. METHODS: Patients (knee osteoarthritis: N = 43; chronic low back pain: N = 41) were subdivided based on extent of pain reduction from baseline to Week 4 of duloxetine (≥30%, 10-30%, or <10% reduction in Brief Pain Inventory-Severity average pain score). Outcome measures were changes from baseline for Brief Pain Inventory-Severity and Brief Pain Inventory-Interference at regular intervals up to Week 65. RESULTS: Mean change from baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Severity was greater in patients with ≥30% early pain reduction than in patients with <10% early pain reduction through Week 27 for both conditions, and also Weeks 47-65 for back pain. Compared with the <10% early pain reduction group, mean change from baseline in the average of seven Brief Pain Inventory-Interference domain scores was greater in the ≥30% or 10-30% early pain reduction groups for knee osteoarthritis (except Weeks 63-65), and in the ≥30% early pain reduction group for chronic low back pain through Week 19. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that patients with knee osteoarthritis who respond well to duloxetine in the first month might experience sustained, long-term pain relief with generally greater quality-of-life improvement than patients with poor initial response. Patients with chronic low back pain who had strong initial response may experience a greater long-term pain relief, but not greater quality-of-life improvement, than patients with poor initial response.

Assessing the periprocedural magnitude of platelet count change in response to lusutrombopag.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Despite limitations, platelet transfusion has been used to minimise bleeding risk in patients with thrombocytopaenia. Lusutrombopag is an oral, thrombopoietin receptor agonist approved for treatment of thrombocytopaenia associated with chronic liver disease in patients undergoing planned invasive procedures. This post-hoc analysis assessed the magnitude of platelet count change based on the integrated per-protocol population from 2 similar phase III multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. METHODS: Adults with chronic liver disease-induced thrombocytopaenia and platelet count <50 (× 109/L) received lusutrombopag 3 mg or placebo ≤7 days before invasive procedure scheduled 9-14 days after randomisation. Platelet transfusion was required per protocol if the platelet count remained <50 no more than 2 days before the planned invasive procedure. Post-hoc analysis included: proportion of patients with platelet count ≥50, ≥1.5-fold increase, and a doubling of platelet count; maximum and maximum change in platelet count; and platelet count time course. RESULTS: Platelet count ≥50, a platelet count increase ≥1.5-fold, and at least a doubling in platelet count were achieved in 88.3%, 86.9%, and 52.6% of patients in the lusutrombopag group (n = 137) vs. 58.6%, 32.3%, and 6.0% of patients in the placebo group (n = 133), respectively. In the lusutrombopag group, median maximum platelet count across baseline platelet counts of <30, ≥30 to <40, and ≥40 was 46, 76, and 87, respectively. Median maximum change in platelet count by baseline platelet count was +24, +42, and +40, respectively. Patients who received lusutrombopag without platelet transfusion achieved a median platelet count ≥50 for 3 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with lusutrombopag experienced a clinically relevant response in platelet count for a substantial duration of time. LAY SUMMARY: Patients with low platelet counts caused by chronic liver disease may not receive planned invasive procedures or surgeries because of an increased risk of bleeding. Lusutrombopag has previously demonstrated efficacy in raising platelet counts and is approved to treat chronic liver disease patients with low platelet counts in advance of a planned surgery. Physicians need to understand more clearly what to expect in terms of platelet count change when using lusutrombopag; this integrated analysis provides data to help guide its clinical application.

Efficacy of duloxetine for multisite pain in patients with knee pain due to osteoarthritis: An exploratory post hoc analysis of a Japanese phase 3 randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Central sensitization, including dysfunction of descending inhibitory pain pathways, may contribute to multisite pain in patients with chronic musculoskeletal conditions. Duloxetine is a centrally acting analgesic that effectively reduces pain in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Here we assessed the efficacy of duloxetine (60 mg/day) in Japanese patients (N = 353) with pain due to knee osteoarthritis based on the number of painful body sites, determined using the Michigan Body Map. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of a phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT02248480). RESULTS: At Week 14, the change from baseline in Brief Pain Inventory-Severity average pain score ("pain reduction") was significantly greater with duloxetine compared with placebo in patients with 3, 4, or ≥5 painful sites, but not in patients with 1 or 2 painful sites. In patients with ≥3 painful sites (57% of patients), pain reduction was significantly greater with duloxetine (n = 100) compared with placebo (n = 101) throughout the study (least squares mean change from baseline to Week 14: -2.68 vs -1.68). Greater pain reduction with duloxetine (n = 77) than placebo (n = 75) also occurred in patients with ≤2 painful sites, although the between-group difference was significant only at Week 4. CONCLUSIONS: These results are consistent with duloxetine enhancing the activity of descending inhibitory pain pathways that are dysfunctional in patients with central sensitization and multisite pain. In addition, these results suggest that duloxetine may be an effective choice of analgesic for patients with knee osteoarthritis and multisite pain.

The Relationship Between Baseline Clinical Symptom Characteristics and Working Ability in Japanese Patients Treated for Major Depressive Disorder and Painful Physical Symptoms.

PURPOSE: The objective of this post hoc analysis was to explore the relationship, including changes over time, between baseline clinical symptom characteristics and working ability, judged by investigators, after 12 weeks of antidepressant monotherapy in Japanese patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and painful physical symptoms (PPS) in a real-world clinical setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective, observational study in patients treated with duloxetine or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors was conducted from 2014 to 2016. Both treatment groups were pooled and divided into 2 groups, "working ability recovered" or "working ability not recovered," based on working ability at the end of the study. Patients were also divided into 4 subgroups by the presence or absence of previous depressive episodes and working ability. Main outcome measures included baseline demographics and clinical characteristics, and the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D17). RESULTS: Comparison between "working ability recovered" (n=122) and "working ability not recovered" (n=91) showed that the percentage of patients with complications and psychotherapy at baseline, and baseline HAM-D17 total, insomnia, somatic, and anxiety scores, were significantly different. The results of subgroup analyses were mostly the same as the results analyzed by working ability alone. Although statistical differences were observed for some outcome measures, the differences at baseline, except use of psychotherapy, may not be applicable clinically, and there were no specific trends observed that could predict working ability. CONCLUSION: This post hoc analysis suggested that most baseline clinical characteristics, including the presence or absence of previous depressive episodes, were not predictive of working ability recovery. However, the use of psychotherapy in parallel with antidepressant monotherapy may be positively associated with working ability recovery. All outcome measures improved over time, reinforcing the importance of continuous treatment and observation to improve and accurately judge working ability in patients with MDD and PPS.

Is platelet monitoring during 7-day lusutrombopag treatment necessary in chronic liver disease patients with thrombocytopenia undergoing planned invasive procedures? A phase IIIb open-label study.

AIM: Lusutrombopag is approved for thrombocytopenia in chronic liver disease patients planned to undergo invasive procedures. In previous clinical studies, lusutrombopag treatment was stopped in patients with an increase in platelet count (PC) of ≥20 × 109 /L from baseline and whose PC was ≥50 × 109 /L (discontinuation criteria). We assessed the influence of platelet monitoring during lusutrombopag treatment in lusutrombopag-naïve patients. METHODS: In this open-label study, Child-Pugh class A and B (A/B) patients were enrolled and treated with lusutrombopag (3 mg/day) for 7 days. In the treatment-naïve A/B-1 group, the discontinuation criteria were applied on day 6. In the treatment-naïve A/B-2 group, the criteria were not applied. In a non-naïve A/B group, the criteria were applied on days 3 and 5-7. The main efficacy end-point was the proportion of patients without platelet transfusion (PT) before the primary invasive procedure. RESULTS: In the A/B-1, A/B-2, and non-naïve A/B groups, the proportions of patients without PT were 80.9% (38/47), 83.0% (39/47), and 75.0% (6/8), respectively. The mean durations of PC ≥ 50 × 109 /L without PT were 20.7, 20.3, and 22.8 days, respectively. Excessive PC increases (≥200 × 109 /L) were not detected in any group. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 4.3%, 6.4%, and 0% of A/B-1, A/B-2, and non-naïve A/B patients, respectively. Severe portal vein thrombosis occurred in one A/B-2 patient (PC 75 × 109 /L at onset). CONCLUSIONS: No meaningful efficacy and safety differences were observed among the groups with or without discontinuation criteria and the non-naïve group. These findings support lusutrombopag treatment without platelet monitoring and retreatment with lusutrombopag.

Lusutrombopag Is Safe and Efficacious for Treatment of Thrombocytopenia in Patients With and Without Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) secondary to chronic liver disease often require invasive procedures but frequently have thrombocytopenia. Lusutrombopag is an agonist of the thrombopoietin receptor that activates platelet production. METHODS: We performed an integrated analysis of data from 2 phase 3 trials (L-PLUS 1, Japan, October 2013 to May 2014, and L-PLUS 2, global, June 2015 to April 2017) that compared the efficacy and safety of lusutrombopag with placebo in patients with chronic liver disease, with and without HCC. Our analysis included patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group grades of 0 or 1, Child-Pugh classes A or B, and a platelet count less than 50 × 109/L who were scheduled to undergo invasive procedures in 9 to 14 days. Patients received lusutrombopag (3 mg) or placebo daily for 7 days or fewer before an invasive procedure. Imaging studies assessed treatment-emergent adverse events, including asymptomatic portal vein thrombosis. The primary end point was no requirement for platelet transfusion before the invasive procedure and rescue therapies for bleeding 7 days or fewer after the invasive procedure. RESULTS: The per-protocol population included 270 patients (95 with HCC). A significantly higher proportion of patients with HCC who received lusutrombopag achieved the primary end point (68.0%) vs patients who received placebo (8.9%) (P < .0001); in patients without HCC, these proportions were 77.0% vs 21.6% (P < .0001). Lusutrombopag reduced the need for platelet transfusions, increased platelet counts for 3 weeks, and reduced the number of bleeding events in patients with and without HCC compared with placebo. Risk of thrombosis was similar to that of placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with and without HCC receiving lusutrombopag had a reduction in the number of platelet transfusions before invasive procedures compared with patients receiving placebo, with no increase in thrombosis or bleeding. L-PLUS 1: JapicCTI-132323; L-PLUS 2: ClinicalTrials.gov number no: NCT02389621.

An Open-Label, 52-Week, Phase III Trial of Duloxetine in Japanese Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of duloxetine treatment for 52 weeks. DESIGN: Multicenter, open-label, phase III clinical study. SETTING: Forty-one medical institutions in Japan. SUBJECTS: Japanese patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). METHODS: Duloxetine 60 mg once-daily was administered for 52 weeks. Safety was evaluated based on adverse events (AEs), vital signs, laboratory test values, electrocardiogram, Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale, and occurrence of falls. The efficacy outcome measures were the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI; average pain, worst pain, least pain, and pain right now), BPI Interference, Patient's Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I), Clinical Global Impressions of Severity (CGI-S), Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire-24 (RDQ-24), 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), and European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions Questionnaire (EQ-5D). RESULTS: In total, 151 patients (83 who completed a 14-week placebo-controlled superiority trial and 68 newly registered patients) were enrolled. The incidence rates of AEs and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were 86.1% and 50.3%, respectively. ADRs with an incidence of ≥5% were somnolence, constipation, nausea, and dry mouth. Treatment discontinuation for AEs occurred in 16 patients. A significant reduction in the BPI average pain score (mean ± SD) was observed at all assessment time points from week 2 (-1.02 ± 1.37) to week 50 (-2.26 ± 1.63), compared with baseline. BPI pain severity (worst pain, least pain, and pain right now), BPI Interference, PGI-I, CGI-S, RDQ-24, SF-36, and EQ-5D showed significant improvement. CONCLUSION: Japanese patients with CLBP had significant pain reduction over 52 weeks without new safety concerns.

Lusutrombopag for the Treatment of Thrombocytopenia in Patients With Chronic Liver Disease Undergoing Invasive Procedures (L-PLUS 2).

Thrombocytopenia may be associated with increased bleeding risk impacting timing and outcome of invasive procedures in patients with chronic liver disease (CLD). Lusutrombopag, a small-molecule, thrombopoietin (TPO) receptor agonist, was evaluated as a treatment to raise platelet counts (PCs) in patients with thrombocytopenia and CLD undergoing invasive procedures. L-PLUS 2 was a global, phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Adults with CLD and baseline PCs < 50 × 109 /L were randomized to receive once-daily lusutrombopag 3 mg or placebo ≤ 7 days before an invasive procedure scheduled 2-7 days after the last dose. The primary endpoint was avoidance of preprocedure platelet transfusion and avoidance of rescue therapy for bleeding. A key secondary endpoint was number of days PCs were ≥ 50 × 109 /L throughout the study. Safety analysis was performed on patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study occurred between June 15, 2015, and April 19, 2017, with a total of 215 randomized patients (lusutrombopag, 108; placebo, 107); 64.8% (70/108) of patients in the lusutrombopag group versus 29.0% (31/107) in the placebo group met the primary endpoint (P < 0.0001; difference of proportion 95% confidence interval [CI], 36.7 [24.9, 48.5]). The median duration of PCs ≥ 50 × 109 /L was 19.2 days with lusutrombopag (without platelet transfusion) compared with 0.0 in the placebo group (with platelet transfusion) (P = 0.0001). Most adverse events were mild or moderate in severity, and rates were similar in the lusutrombopag and placebo groups (47.7% and 48.6%, respectively). Conclusion: Lusutrombopag was superior to placebo for reducing the need for platelet transfusions and achieved durable PC response in patients with thrombocytopenia and CLD undergoing invasive procedures, with a safety profile similar to placebo.

A randomized controlled trial of lusutrombopag in Japanese patients with chronic liver disease undergoing radiofrequency ablation.

BACKGROUND: Thrombocytopenia represents an obstacle for invasive procedures in chronic liver disease (CLD) patients. We aimed to estimate the appropriate dose and evaluate the efficacy and safety of lusutrombopag for the treatment of thrombocytopenia before percutaneous liver radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for primary hepatic cancer in patients with CLD. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study conducted in Japan, 61 CLD patients with platelet count < 50 × 103/µL at screening were randomized to placebo or lusutrombopag 2, 3, or 4 mg once daily for 7 days, followed by a 28-day post-treatment assessment period. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients who did not require platelet transfusion before RFA. The pre-specified key secondary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of responders. Adverse events (AEs) and thrombosis-related AEs were evaluated. RESULTS: The proportion of patients who did not require platelet transfusion before RFA and that of responders were significantly higher (p < 0.01) in the 2-mg (80.0, 66.7%), 3-mg (81.3, 68.8%), and 4-mg groups (93.3, 80.0%) compared with the placebo group (20.0, 6.7%) and showed a dose-dependent effect. The incidence of AEs was 97.8 and 100% in the lusutrombopag (all groups) and placebo groups, respectively; no dose-related increase was observed. Four patients experienced thrombosis-related events (one each in the placebo and 2-mg groups, and two in the 4-mg group). A total of 16 (18%) adverse drug reactions occurred in the safety analysis set. CONCLUSIONS: Lusutrombopag 3 mg once daily for 7 days was effective without raising concerns about excessive increases in platelet count. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered at JapicCTI-121944.

Lusutrombopag Reduces Need for Platelet Transfusion in Patients With Thrombocytopenia Undergoing Invasive Procedures.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Platelet transfusion is used to prevent hemorrhagic events in patients with thrombocytopenia undergoing invasive procedures, but there are many disadvantages. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of lusutrombopag in patients with chronic liver disease and thrombocytopenia undergoing invasive procedures. METHODS: We performed a double-blind, parallel-group, phase 3 study of 96 patients with chronic liver disease and thrombocytopenia (platelet counts below 50,000/µL) undergoing invasive procedures from October 2013 to May 2014 at 81 centers in Japan. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to groups given once-daily lusutrombopag (3 mg) or placebo for up to 7 days. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients not requiring platelet transfusion before the invasive procedure. The protocol-defined response (platelet count 50,000/µL or more with an increase of 20,000/µL or more from baseline) and the time course of the change in platelet count were also evaluated. Adverse events were recorded. RESULTS: The proportions of patients who did not require preoperative platelet transfusion were 79.2% (38/48) in the lusutrombopag group and 12.5% (6/48) in the placebo group (P < .0001). A response was observed in 77.1% (37/48) of patients in the lusutrombopag group and 6.3% (3/48) of patients in the placebo group (P < .0001). In the lusutrombopag group without platelet transfusion, the median platelet count was 50,000/µL or more after 5 days; the mean time to reach the maximum platelet count was 13.4 days; and the number of days (adjusted mean) during which the platelet count was 50,000/µL or more was 21.09 days. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 8.3% of patients in the lusutrombopag group and 2.1% of patients in the placebo group. Two patients (1 per group) had a thrombotic event, but neither were associated with an excessive increase in platelet count (200,000/µL or more). CONCLUSION: In a placebo-controlled trial, lusutrombopag was effective in achieving and maintaining the target platelet count in patients with chronic liver disease and thrombocytopenia undergoing invasive procedures. No significant safety concerns were raised. Japanese clinical trial registration no: JapicCTI-132323.

Response to duloxetine in patients with knee pain due to osteoarthritis: an exploratory post hoc analysis of a Japanese Phase III randomized study.

PURPOSE: To assess whether patients with knee osteoarthritis pain who have early pain reduction or treatment-related adverse events of special interest (TR-AESIs; constipation, decreased appetite, malaise, nausea, somnolence, thirst) with duloxetine treatment are more likely to have later improvements in pain and quality of life (QOL) relative to placebo than patients without these early indicators. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of 14-week randomized trial of Japanese patients with knee osteoarthritis pain (Brief Pain Inventory [BPI]-Severity average pain score ≥4) receiving duloxetine 60 mg/day (n=177 analyzed) or placebo (n=176). Primary trial outcome was change from baseline in BPI-Severity average pain at Week 14. Subgroups included early pain reduction (≥30%, 10%-30%, or <10% decrease in BPI-Severity average pain at Week 4) and early TR-AESIs (with/without TR-AESIs by Week 2). Measures included changes from baseline in BPI-Severity average pain, QOL (BPI-Interference, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index), Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I), and response rate (proportion achieving ≥30% or ≥50% pain reduction at Week 14). RESULTS: The ≥30% early pain reduction subgroup (n=93) had significantly greater improvements in pain, QOL, and PGI-I and higher ≥30% and ≥50% response rates than placebo; the 10%-30% (n=45) and the <10% (n=33) pain reduction subgroups did not show the same (except 10%-30% group: PGI-I at Week 10 and some QOL at Weeks 10 and/or 14). Both TR-AESI subgroups (with, n=52; without, n=125) had significantly greater improvements in pain, PGI-I, and most QOL measures and higher response rates than placebo. CONCLUSION: Early efficacy responses to duloxetine treatment, but not early TR-AESIs, may predict later pain reduction and QOL improvements in Japanese patients with knee osteoarthritis pain. CLINICALTRIALSGOV: NCT02248480.

Safety and efficacy of duloxetine in Japanese patients with chronic knee pain due to osteoarthritis: an open-label, long-term, Phase III extension study.

PURPOSE: To assess long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of duloxetine in Japanese patients with chronic knee pain due to osteoarthritis. METHODS: In this open-label extension study (NCT02335346), Japanese patients with knee osteoarthritis and pain (Brief Pain Inventory [BPI] - Severity average pain score ≥4 at start of randomized trial) who had previously received duloxetine 60 mg/day or placebo for 14 weeks in a double-blind randomized trial entered the extension and received duloxetine 60 mg/day for 48 weeks. The primary outcome was safety/tolerability, secondary outcomes were change in BPI-Severity (BPI-S) average pain, BPI-Interference (BPI-I), Patient Global Impression-Improvement (PGI-I), Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF36), and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and exploratory outcomes were knee range of motion (efficacy outcome) and Kellgren-Lawrence grade (safety outcome). RESULTS: Of 323 patients who completed the randomized trial, 93 (50 placebo, 43 duloxetine) entered the extension. Most patients (85, 91.4%) experienced an adverse event, most commonly constipation, nasopharyngitis, somnolence, and dry mouth (≥10% of patients). There were eight serious adverse events in seven patients and no deaths. No obvious duloxetine-related changes were observed in laboratory tests, vital signs, or electrocardiograms. The change from baseline in BPI-S average pain score was significant throughout the extension. Significant reductions in BPI-I, PGI-I, CGI-I, WOMAC, and SF36 scores were also maintained through 52 weeks. There were no substantial changes in range of motion or Kellgren-Lawrence grade. CONCLUSION: In Japanese patients with chronic knee pain due to osteoarthritis, long-term treatment with duloxetine was well tolerated and associated with sustained improvements in pain and health-related quality of life without radiographic deterioration.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase III trial of duloxetine in Japanese patients with knee pain due to osteoarthritis.

PURPOSE: To examine the efficacy and safety of duloxetine in Japanese patients with knee pain due to osteoarthritis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive duloxetine 60 mg/day or placebo for 14 weeks in a double-blind manner (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02248480). The primary efficacy endpoint was mean change in Brief Pain Inventory pain severity (BPI-Severity) average pain. Secondary endpoints included improvement in other BPI-Severity scales, Patient Global Impression of Improvement, Clinical Global Impressions of Severity, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scales, range of motion of the knee joint, safety and tolerability, and structural changes on X-ray images. RESULTS: Of the 354 randomized patients, 161 in the duloxetine group and 162 in the placebo group completed the study. BPI-Severity average pain improved significantly with duloxetine vs. placebo (-2.57 vs. -1.80; adjusted mean difference: -0.77; 95% CI: -1.11 to -0.43; P<0.0001). Secondary efficacy endpoints and most HRQoL scales showed greater improvements in the duloxetine group than the placebo group. Adverse events observed in ≥5% of patients that were more frequent in the duloxetine than placebo group were somnolence, constipation, dry mouth, nausea, malaise, and decreased appetite. There were no marked changes in range of motion of the knee joint (efficacy), X-ray images, or Kellgren-Lawrence grade (safety) in either group. CONCLUSION: Duloxetine reduced pain and improved function in patients with knee osteoarthritis, without causing X-ray abnormalities or altered knee joint mobility. Reduced pain was associated with improved HRQoL. Adverse events were consistent with duloxetine's known safety profile.

Response to duloxetine in chronic low back pain: exploratory post hoc analysis of a Japanese Phase III randomized study.

PURPOSE: Duloxetine is efficacious for chronic low back pain (CLBP). This post hoc analysis of a Japanese randomized, placebo-controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01855919) assessed whether patients with CLBP with early pain reduction or treatment-related adverse events of special interest (TR-AESIs; nausea, somnolence, constipation) have enhanced responses to duloxetine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (N = 456) with CLBP for ≥6 months and Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) average pain severity score of ≥4 were randomized (1:1) to duloxetine 60 mg/day or placebo for 14 weeks. Primary outcome was change from baseline in BPI average pain severity score (pain reduction). Subgroup analyses included early pain reduction (≥30%, 10%-30%, or <10% at Week 4) and early TR-AESIs (with or without TR-AESIs by Week 2). Measures included changes from baseline in BPI average pain severity score and BPI Interference scores (quality of life; QOL), and response rate (≥30% or ≥50% pain reduction at Week 14). RESULTS: Patients with ≥30% early pain reduction (n = 108) or early TR-AESIs (n = 50) had significantly greater improvements in pain and QOL than placebo-treated patients (n = 226), whereas patients with 10%-30% (n = 63) or <10% (n = 48) pain reduction did not; patients without early TR-AESIs (n = 180) had significant improvements in pain at Week 14. Response rates (≥30%/≥50% pain reduction) were 94.4%/82.4%, 66.7%/49.2%, and 25.0%/18.8% for patients with ≥30%, 10%-30%, and <10% early pain reduction, respectively, 74.0%/64.0% for patients with early TR-AESIs, 67.2%/54.4% for patients without early TR-AESIs, and 52.2%/39.4% for placebo. CONCLUSION: Early pain reduction or TR-AESIs may predict which CLBP patients are most likely to respond to duloxetine with improvements in pain and QOL.

Group-sequential three-arm noninferiority clinical trial designs.

We discuss group-sequential three-arm noninferiority clinical trial designs that include active and placebo controls for evaluating both assay sensitivity and noninferiority. We extend two existing approaches, the fixed margin and fraction approaches, into a group-sequential setting with two decision-making frameworks. We investigate the operating characteristics including power, Type I error rate, maximum, and expected sample sizes, as design factors vary. In addition, we discuss sample size recalculation and its impact on the power and Type I error rate via a simulation study.

An open-label, long-term, phase III extension trial of duloxetine in Japanese patients with fibromyalgia.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of duloxetine 60 mg in Japanese patients with fibromyalgia enrolled from a preceding randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III duloxetine trial. METHODS: This was a long-term, open-label extension study. Patients received oral duloxetine once daily at a dose of 20 mg for 1 week, followed by 40 mg for 1 week, and then 60 mg for 48 weeks. The primary outcome was the frequency of adverse events (AEs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) of duloxetine. Efficacy and health outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: In total, 149 patients were enrolled from the preceding study. The median length of treatment was 364.0 days. The incidence of AEs and ADRs was 92.6 and 63.8%, respectively. ADRs occurring at an incidence of ≥5% were somnolence, constipation, nausea, weight increase, thirst, and malaise. The proportion of patients with mild, moderate, and severe AEs was 80.5, 10.1, and 2.0%. There were no serious treatment-related AEs in this study. The Brief Pain Inventory average pain score improved at all time-points compared with baseline (mean change ± standard deviation at Week 50 was -1.31 ± 1.70). CONCLUSIONS: Duloxetine was safe and effective in the long-term treatment of Japanese patients with fibromyalgia.

Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Phase III Trial of Duloxetine Monotherapy in Japanese Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain.

STUDY DESIGN: A 14-week, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled study of Japanese patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) who were randomized to either duloxetine 60 mg once daily or placebo. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of duloxetine monotherapy in Japanese patients with CLBP. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: In Japan, duloxetine is approved for the treatment of depression, diabetic neuropathic pain, and pain associated with fibromyalgia; however, no clinical study of duloxetine has been conducted for CLBP. METHODS: The primary efficacy measure was the change in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) average pain score from baseline to Week 14. Secondary efficacy measures included BPI pain (worst pain, least pain, pain right now), Patient's Global Impression of Improvement, Clinical Global Impressions of Severity, and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, among other measures, and safety and tolerability. RESULTS: In total, 458 patients were randomized to receive either duloxetine (n = 232) or placebo (n = 226). The BPI average pain score improved significantly in the duloxetine group compared with that in the placebo group at Week 14 [-2.43 ±â€Š0.11 vs. -1.96 ±â€Š0.11, respectively; between-group difference (95% confidence interval), - 0.46 [-0.77 to-0.16]; P = 0.0026]. The duloxetine group showed significant improvement in many secondary measures compared with the placebo group, including BPI pain (least pain, pain right now) (between-group difference: -1.69 ±â€Š0.10, P = 0.0009; -2.42 ±â€Š0.12, P P = 0.0230, respectively), Patient's Global Impression of Improvement (2.46 ±â€Š0.07, P = 0.0026), Clinical Global Impressions of Severity (-1.46 ±â€Š0.06, P = 0.0019), and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (-3.86 ±â€Š0.22, P = 0.0439). Adverse events occurring at a significantly higher incidence in the duloxetine group were somnolence, constipation, nausea, dizziness, and dry mouth, most of which were mild or moderate in severity and were resolved or improved. CONCLUSION: Duloxetine 60 mg was effective and well tolerated in Japanese CLBP patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.