Ferrous sulfate oral solution in young children with iron deficiency anemia: An open-label trial of efficacy, safety, and acceptability.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the efficacy, safety, and acceptability of a new ferrous sulfate oral solution (Tardyferon® 20 mg/mL) in young children with mild or moderate iron deficiency anemia (IDA). METHODS: This was a multicenter, national, single-arm, open-label study. Children aged 6-53 months presenting with mild or moderate IDA (i.e., blood hemoglobin (Hb) ranging from 7.0 to 10.9 g/dL and serum ferritin <12 ng/mL) were eligible for inclusion. The ferrous sulfate heptahydrate solution (2 mg/kg/day) was administered orally for 3 months. If normalization of either Hb or ferritin was not achieved at month 3 the treatment was continued for another 3 months. RESULTS: Of the 100 children screened, 21 aged 6-17 months were included and received the study treatment, and 19 were analyzed for hematologic outcomes at month 3. Only one patient continued treatment for the additional 3 months. At month 3, mean ± SD Hb and ferritin levels were 12.0 ± 0.7 g/dL and 31.5 ± 19.4 ng/mL, respectively. Hemoglobin and ferritin levels were normalized in 95% (18/19) and 84% (16/19) of the patients, respectively. Treatment compliance and levels of satisfaction of both the parents and the investigators were high. Overall, 33.3% of patients (7/21) experienced at least one adverse event. Only one patient (4.8%) experienced a drug-related adverse event (upper abdominal pain). CONCLUSIONS: A 2 mg/kg daily dose of the new oral ferrous sulfate heptahydrate solution provides substantial therapeutic benefit with high levels of tolerability in young children who have mild or moderate IDA.

Pain relief of sore throat with a new anti-inflammatory throat lozenge, ibuprofen 25 mg: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, international phase III study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of a new oromucosal ibuprofen form, ibuprofen 25 mg lozenge, in single and repeat dosing for up to 4 days, to the matched placebo, in the treatment of acute sore throat pain in adults. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adult patients with non-streptococcal sore throat and signs of moderate-to-severe associated pain (≥5 on the objective Tonsillo-Pharyngitis Assessment 21-point scale and ≥60 mm on the subjective 0-100 mm visual analogue Sore Throat Pain Intensity Scale [STPIS]) were assigned ibuprofen 25 mg (n=194) or matching placebo (n=191) lozenge treatment. Efficacy was assessed (at the investigating centre up to 2 hours after first dosing, then on an ambulatory basis) by parameters derived from patient's scores on scales of pain relief, pain intensity, and global efficacy assessment. The primary efficacy end-point was the time-weighted TOTal PAin Relief (TOTPAR) over 2 hours after first dosing using the Sore Throat Relief Scale (STRS). Safety and local tolerability were assessed. RESULTS: Ibuprofen 25 mg was superior to placebo on numerous pain relief parameters; TOTPAR was significantly higher with ibuprofen 25 mg over 2 hours after first dosing (P<.05), the effect being apparent from the first evaluation at 15 minutes (P<.05). The STPIS reduction in favour of ibuprofen 25 mg was not significant vs placebo. Mean STRS scores and patient's global efficacy assessment both reflected a higher efficacy of ibuprofen 25 mg over the 4-day treatment period with tests of statistical significance up to day 1 evening (P<.05), and, in patients with still clinically significant pain (n=128), after an average 4 days (P<.01). Ibuprofen 25 mg lozenge was well tolerated with a safety profile similar to placebo. CONCLUSION: Low-dose ibuprofen 25 mg lozenge in repeat dosing provides in adults more efficacious and rapid relief of sore throat pain and is as well tolerated as placebo. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01785862.

Binding of the D3-preferring antipsychotic candidate F17464 to dopamine D3 and D2 receptors: a PET study in healthy subjects with [11C]-(+)-PHNO.

RATIONALE: F17464, a dopamine D3 receptor antagonist with relatively high D3 selectivity (70 fold vs D2 in vitro), exhibits an antipsychotic profile in preclinical studies, and therapeutic efficacy was demonstrated in a randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial in patients with schizophrenia (Bitter et al. Neuropsychopharmacology 44(11):1917-1924, 2019). OBJECTIVE: This open-label study in healthy male subjects aimed at characterizing F17464 binding to D3/D2 receptors and the time course of receptor occupancy using positron emission tomography (PET) imaging with a D3-preferring tracer, [11C]-(+)-PHNO. METHODS: PET scans were performed at baseline and following a single 30 mg or 15 mg dose of F17464 (3 subjects/dose), and blood samples were collected for pharmacokinetic analysis. Receptor occupancy was calculated based upon reduction in binding potential of the tracer following F17464 administration. The relationship between plasma F17464 concentration and D3/D2 receptor occupancy was modeled and the plasma concentration corresponding to 50% receptor occupancy (EC50) calculated. RESULTS: Both doses of F17464 robustly blocked [11C]-(+)-PHNO D3 receptor binding, with substantial occupancy from 1 h post-administration, which increased at 6-9 h (89-98% and 79-87% for the 30 mg and 15 mg groups, respectively) and remained detectable at 22 h. In contrast, D2 binding was only modestly blocked at all time points (< 18%). F17464 exhibited a combination of rapid peripheral kinetics and hysteresis (persistence of binding 22 h post-dose despite low plasma concentration). The best estimate of the EC50 was 19 ng ml-1 (~ 40 nM). CONCLUSION: Overall, F17464 was strongly D3-selective in healthy volunteers, a unique profile for an antipsychotic candidate drug.

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of F17464, a preferential D3 antagonist, in the treatment of acute exacerbation of schizophrenia.

F17464, a highly potent preferential D3 antagonist, is a novel compound in development for schizophrenia treatment. This phase II, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study in five European countries evaluated the efficacy and safety of F17464, 20 mg twice daily, versus placebo over 6 weeks in patients with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia. Change from baseline to Day 43 of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score was the primary outcome. The data from 134 randomized patients (67 per group) were analyzed (efficacy/safety). Using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) after last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation (primary analysis), the PANSS total score reduction was statistically significantly greater for F17464 than placebo treated subjects at endpoint (p = 0.014); using ANCOVA with Multiple Imputation (MI) method, the between-group difference was in favor of F17464 but did not reach statistical significance. Differences in PANSS positive and general psychopathology subscale score, Marder positive factor score, PANSS response, and PANSS resolution criteria were also statistically significant in favor of F17464 (p values < 0.05) using the LOCF method, with similar results as for the primary analysis using the MI method. Treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were reported in 49.3% and 46.3% of patients on F17464 and placebo, respectively. The most common AEs in F17464 group: insomnia, agitation, and increased triglycerides; worsening of schizophrenia/drug ineffective was less frequent in F17464. Interestingly, no weight gain, no extrapyramidal disorder except rare akathisia were observed under F17464. This 6-week trial demonstrated therapeutic efficacy of 40 mg/day F17464 in improving symptoms of acute exacerbation of schizophrenia with a favorable safety profile.

Safety of Oral Propranolol for the Treatment of Infantile Hemangioma: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Given the widespread use of propranolol in infantile hemangioma (IH) it was considered essential to perform a systematic review of its safety. The objectives of this review were to evaluate the safety profile of oral propranolol in the treatment of IH. METHODS: We searched Embase and Medline databases (2007-July 2014) and unpublished data from the manufacturer of Hemangiol/Hemangeol (marketed pediatric formulation of oral propranolol; Pierre Fabre Dermatologie, Lavaur, France). Selected studies included ≥10 patients treated with oral propranolol for IH and that either reported ≥1 adverse event or effect (AE) or planned to capture AEs. Data capture was standardized and extracted study design, demographic characteristics, IH characteristics, intervention, and safety outcomes. AEs were assigned a system organ class and preferred term. RESULTS: A total of 83 of 398 identified literature records met the inclusion criteria, covering 3766 propranolol-treated patients. The manufacturer's data for 3 pooled clinical trials (435 propranolol-treated patients) and 1 Compassionate Use Program (1661 patients) were included. AE data were reported for 1945 of 5862 propranolol-treated patients. The most frequently reported AEs included a range of sleep disturbances, peripheral coldness, and agitation. The most serious AEs (atrioventricular block, bradycardia, hypotension, bronchospasm/bronchial hyperreactivity, and hypoglycemia-related seizures) were managed by decreasing doses or temporary/permanent discontinuation of propranolol. Limitations included the variety of included study designs; monitoring, collection, and reporting of AE data; small sample sizes for some articles; and the wide scope of review. CONCLUSIONS: Oral propranolol is well tolerated if appropriate pretreatment assessments and within-treatment monitoring are performed to exclude patients with contraindications and to minimize serious side effects during treatment.

Dual reuptake inhibitor milnacipran and spinal pain pathways in fibromyalgia patients: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Investigations based on quantitative sensory testing have consistently shown evidence of allodynia in fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) patients involving both the spinal and supraspinal pain regulatory systems. Functional imaging studies have demonstrated enhanced neural activities in pain-related brain areas as well as impairment of pain inhibition in the descending nociceptive regulatory system. A higher state of excitability of spinal nociceptive neurons as evidenced by lowered nociceptive flexion reflex R-III (NFR) threshold was reported for FMS patients. The NFR procedure has been shown to be a valuable tool to evaluate pharmacologically active therapeutic agents at the spinal level. OBJECTIVE: Serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors have been shown to reduce pain in FMS patients possibly through descending monoaminergic pain pathways modulation. This randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial assessed the pharmacodynamic activity of the dual-reuptake inhibitor milnacipran (MLN) at the spinal level by means of the objective spinal NFR. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: A single academic medical center, outpatient setting. METHODS: Seven-week exposure (100, 150, 200mg/day) in women fibromyalgia patients. Evaluation consisted of extensive quantitative sensory testing including determination of the NFR threshold, self-reported standard questionnaires investigating pain, visual analog scales, fibromyalgia impact, health-related quality of life, depression and anxiety questionnaires, as well as the Patient's Global Impression of Change (PGIC). Analysis of covariance adjusted for baseline value was used for all endpoints. RESULTS: Seventy-seven (39 placebo, 38 milnacipran all doses) out of 80 randomized patients were available for analysis. The absence of influence of MLN (any dose) on the NFR surprisingly contrasted with the dose-dependent analgesic effect observed in MLN-treated patients with an adjusted change difference of -18.4mm (-30.9; -5.8) in pain reduction between placebo and the maximum dosage (200 mg) MLN groups (P = 0.02). Unchanged depression and anxiety scores confirmed the predominant selectivity of the analgesic effect of MLN on nociceptive pain pathway. Self-reported questionnaires consistently reflected the positive effects of MLN on quality of life and psychological well-being. Odds ratio 5.1 for PGIC responders (i.e. much/very much improved) was significantly in favor of MLN (P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Milnacipran has a predominantly supraspinal analgesic effect as evidenced by the significant clinical benefits and the absence of changes in the nociceptive spinal reflex threshold. Higher dose was associated with higher pain reduction. Reported analgesia was independent of patients' emotional status.

Longterm therapeutic response to milnacipran treatment for fibromyalgia. A European 1-year extension study following a 3-month study.

OBJECTIVE: This double-blind, 1-year extension study investigated the longterm efficacy and safety of milnacipran 100, 150, and 200 mg/day in the treatment of fibromyalgia (FM) in completers of a 3-month European double-blind lead-in study of milnacipran 200 mg/day versus placebo. METHODS: A total of 468 patients with FM successfully completing the lead-in study were either blindly maintained on milnacipran 200 mg/day (MLN200:MLN200, n = 198) or (if previously receiving placebo) rerandomized to milnacipran 100 mg/day (PBO:MLN100, n = 91), 150 mg/day (PBO:MLN150, n = 92), or 200 mg/day (PBO:MLN200, n = 87) for an additional 12 months (including a 4-week dose escalation). The main efficacy endpoint was a 2-measure composite responder rate (relative to lead-in study baseline) incorporating the weekly-recall pain score recorded on a visual analog scale and the Patient Global Impression of Change score. A panel of other assessments including the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire explored the multidimensional aspects of FM. Descriptive analyses using the last observation carried forward approach were performed. RESULTS: At the 1-year endpoint, the proportion of composite responders (relative to the lead-in study baseline) ranged from 27.5% (PBO:MLN100) to 35.9% (MLN200:MLN200), and had increased from the extension study baseline by 15.2% (PBO:MLN150) to 20.7% (PBO:MLN200 and MLN200:MLN200). At endpoint, an improvement from both baselines was shown in all groups on pain, fatigue, sleep, and quality of life measures. Up to 1 year, all doses of milnacipran were safe and well tolerated. The most common drug-related adverse events were hyperhidrosis and nausea. CONCLUSION: Over 1 year, milnacipran 100, 150, and 200 mg/day exhibited sustained and safe therapeutic effects on predominant symptoms of FM. Registered as trial no. NCT00757731.

Milnacipran and venlafaxine at flexible doses (up to 200 mg/day) in the outpatient treatment of adults with moderate-to-severe major depressive disorder: a 24-week randomized, double-blind exploratory study.

The objective of this exploratory, multicenter, randomized, double-blind study, was to evaluate the efficacy and safety/tolerability of milnacipran and venlafaxine administered at flexible doses (100, 150 or 200 mg/day, bid administration) for 24 weeks (including 4 weeks up titration period) in the outpatient treatment of adults presenting with a moderate or severe episode of major depressive disorder (MDD) without high suicidal risk (MINI-DSM IV-TR). Of the 195 patients included, 134 (68.7%) completed the study. At baseline the two groups were similar, except there was a higher proportion of patients whose episode was severe-DSM IV in the milnacipran group (63.3% versus 54.0% in the venlafaxine group). The initial MADRS score (mean 31.0) decreased progressively during the study, and this decrease was in the two treatment groups (n = 177: 90 milnacipran; 87 venlafaxine) at week 24 (observed case/OC, mean change -23.1 milnacipran; -22.4 venlafaxine). The rate of MADRS response (reduction >/= 50%) at week 8 and week 24-last observation carried forward/LOCF was similar in the two groups (week 8: 64.4% milnacipran; 65.5% venlafaxine; week 24: 70% milnacipran; 77% venlafaxine), as was the rate of MADRS remission (score