Sumatriptan nasal spray for the acute treatment of migraine. Results of two clinical studies.

BACKGROUND: Sumatriptan nasal spray may be particularly useful for patients whose nausea and vomiting preclude them from using oral migraine medication or for patients who prefer not to use an injectable migraine medication. The objective of this study was to evaluate in two clinical studies the efficacy and tolerability of the intranasal form of sumatriptan in the acute treatment of a single migraine attack. International Headache Society-diagnosed adult migraineurs in two randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter studies (n = 409 and 436) used sumatriptan nasal spray 20 mg, 10 mg, or placebo (2:1:1) for the acute treatment of a single migraine attack at home. Predose and at predetermined postdose intervals, patients recorded headache severity (none, mild, moderate, severe); time to meaningful relief; clinical disability (none, mildly impaired, severely impaired, bed rest required); presence/absence of nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia; and the occurrence of adverse events. Two hours postdose in the two studies, moderate or severe baseline pain was reduced to mild or none in 62 to 63% of patients treated with sumatriptan 20 mg, 43 to 54% of patients treated with sumatriptan 10 mg, and 29 to 35% of placebo-treated patients (p < 0.05 20 mg versus placebo for both studies and 10 mg versus placebo for study 1). Onset of relief relative to placebo began as early as 15 minutes postdose (sumatriptan 20 mg, study 2). Clinical disability at 2 hours postdose was reported as mildly impaired or normal in 72 to 74% of patients treated with sumatriptan 20 mg, 56 to 68% of patients treated with sumatriptan 10 mg, and 47 to 58% of placebo-treated patients (p < 0.05 20 mg versus placebo for both studies). Similar efficacy rates were observed for nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia. The most common adverse event in the active treatment groups was disturbance of taste (bad, bitter, or unpleasant taste). Aside from this event, the pattern and incidence of adverse events did not differ among treatment groups. From these results we determined that sumatriptan nasal spray is a rapidly effective, well-tolerated migraine treatment. The 20-mg dose was effective in treating the entire migraine symptom complex, and the 10-mg dose was less consistently effective.

Effectiveness of colesevelam hydrochloride in decreasing LDL cholesterol in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia: a 24-week randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of colesevelam hydrochloride, a new nonsystemic lipid-lowering agent. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled trial performed in 1998, 494 patients with primary hypercholesterolemia (low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol level > or = 130 mg/dL and < or = 220 mg/dL) were randomized to receive placebo or colesevelam (2.3 g/d, 3.0 g/d, 3.8 g/d, or 4.5 g/d) for 24 weeks. Fasting serum lipid profiles were measured to assess efficacy. Adverse events were monitored, and discontinuation rates and compliance rates were analyzed. The primary outcome measure was the mean absolute change of LDL cholesterol from baseline to the end of the 24-week treatment period. RESULTS: Colesevelam lowered mean LDL cholesterol levels 9% to 18% in a dose-dependent manner (P<.001), with a median LDL cholesterol reduction of 20% at 4.5 g/d. The reduction in LDL cholesterol levels was maximal after 2 weeks and sustained throughout the study. Mean total cholesterol levels decreased 4% to 10% (P<.001), while median high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels increased 3% to 4% (P<.001). Median triglyceride levels increased by 5% to 10% in placebo and colesevelam treatment groups relative to baseline (P<.05), but none of these differences were significantly different from placebo. Mean apolipoprotein B levels decreased 6% to 12% in an apparent dose-dependent manner (P<.001). No significant differences occurred in adverse events or discontinuation rates between groups, and compliance rates were between 88% and 92% for all groups. CONCLUSIONS: Colesevelam was efficacious, decreasing mean LDL cholesterol levels by up to 18%, and well tolerated without serious adverse events.

Influence of age on the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of the novel HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor cerivastatin in healthy male volunteers.

The safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of cerivastatin, a novel, synthetic, potent, and highly selective HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor, were studied in 48 young and elderly male volunteers in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Eight men ranging from 18 to 38 years of age (young) and 15 men ranging from 65 to 78 years of age (elderly) received 0.1-mg cerivastatin tablets daily for 7 days. The remaining subjects (8 young and 17 elderly) received matching placebo tablets. Cerivastatin was well tolerated in elderly and young subjects. Adverse events were mild and occurred less frequently in the participants receiving cerivastatin than in those receiving placebo. In those participants given cerivastatin, the incidence of adverse events was similar for both age groups (4 of 8 young subjects and 8 of 15 elderly subjects). Transient and mild elevations in creatine kinase and transaminase levels were evenly distributed across the cerivastatin and placebo groups. Pharmacokinetic parameters, including area under the concentration curve (AUC), peak plasma concentration (Cmax), time to Cmax (tmax), and elimination half-life (t1/2), were similar between the two age groups. The mean elimination t1/2 for both groups was approximately 4 hours. These results indicate that cerivastatin is well tolerated in elderly male volunteers at a dosage of 0.1 mg/day. Further, the pharmacokinetics of cerivastatin are not altered as a consequence of age. Dose adjustment is therefore not required in elderly men.

Tramadol/acetaminophen combination tablets and codeine/acetaminophen combination capsules for the management of chronic pain: a comparative trial.

BACKGROUND: Opioid/acetaminophen (APAP) combination analgesics are widely prescribed for the relief of moderate pain. Tramadol is a synthetic analgesic that has been shown to be effective both alone and in combination with APAP. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of tramadol/APAP tablets with codeine/APAP capsules. METHODS: This 4-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, active-control, double-dummy, multicenter trial compared tramadol/APAP (37.5 mg/325 mg) with codeine/APAP (30 mg/300 mg) for the management of chronic nonmalignant low back pain, osteoarthritis (OA) pain, or both in adults. Pain relief (scale, 0 = none to 4 = complete) and pain intensity (scale, 0 = none to 3 = severe) were measured 30 minutes and then hourly for 6 hours after the first daily dose each week. Patients and investigators assessed the efficacy (scale, 1 = poor to 5 = excellent) of each medication, and patients recorded daily doses of study and rescue medications. RESULTS: A total of 462 patients (mean age, 57.6 years) were randomly assigned to treatment, with 112 (24%) reporting chronic low back pain, 162 (35%) reporting OA pain, and 188 (41%) reporting both low back and OA pain; 309 patients (67%) received tramadol/APAP and 153 (33%) received codeine/APAP. Pain relief and changes in pain intensity were comparable from day 1, as early as 30 minutes after the first dose, and lasted for at least 6 hours. Total pain relief scores (11.9 for tramadol/APAP; 11.4 for codeine/APAP) and sum of pain intensity differences (3.8 for tramadol/APAP; 3.3 for codeine/APAP) were also comparable throughout. Overall assessments of efficacy by patients (mean score 2.9 in each treatment group) and investigators (mean score 3.0 for tramadol/APAP, 2.9 for codeine/APAP) were similar for the 2 treatment groups. Equivalent mean doses (3.5 tablets or capsules daily) and maximum daily doses (5.5 tablets or 5.7 capsules) were used in the 2 treatment groups. The overall incidence of adverse events was comparable, with a significantly higher proportion of patients in the codeine/APAP group reporting somnolence (24% [37/153] vs 17% [54/309], P = 0.05) or constipation (21% [32/153] vs 11% [35/309], P < 0.01) and a larger proportion of patients in the tramadol/APAP group reporting headache (11% [34/309] vs 7% [11/153], P = 0.08). CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that tramadol/APAP tablets (37.5 mg/325 mg) are as effective as codeine/ APAP capsules (30 mg/300 mg) in the treatment of chronic nonmalignant low back pain and OA pain and are better tolerated.

Evaluation of CoaguChek Pro ACT in cardiac catheterization laboratory.

The objective of this study was to assess the analytical performance of CoaguChek Pro ACT assay versus Hemochron Celite ACT assay concerning activated clotting time (ACT) values and the correlations versus heparin. Enrolled were 158 patients and 101 normal subjects from five cardiac catheterization laboratories (cathlabs). Two different CoaguChek Pro ACT lots were compared to different lots of Hemochron Celite ACT. All sites used arterial blood and one site also used venous blood. Determinations were carried out before and directly after heparinization, and 1-4 h later. Besides the ACT values, hematocrit, platelet counts and factor Xa levels were also determined. The correlations between the Hemochron Celite lots and the two different CoaguChek Pro lots for arterial and venous blood for all sites were good (r=0.88 and 0.84). The agreement between both CoaguChek Pro ACT lots was excellent (r=0.99). The correlations between heparin and CoaguChek Pro ACT were similar to those for the Hemochron Celite lots. There was no influence of the hematocrit and the platelets. The imprecision of the method was very good (CV<6%). This demonstrates that the CoaguChek Pro ACT assay is especially useful for monitoring heparin in cathlabs.

Efficacy and safety of sibutramine for weight loss in obese patients with hypertension well controlled by beta-adrenergic blocking agents: a placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomised trial.

Sibutramine is a serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor that is effective for long-term weight reduction and maintenance in obese patients when used as an adjunct to dietary and behavioural measures. Because the inhibition of noradrenaline reuptake may be expected to increase systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP) and pulse rate (PR), a 12-week multi-centre, placebo-controlled, double-blind study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of sibutramine for weight loss in obese patients whose hypertension was well controlled (DBP < or = 95 mm Hg) by beta-adrenergic blocking agents (beta-blockers), with or without concomitant thiazide diuretics. Of the 61 patients randomised to sibutramine 20 mg once daily or placebo, 55 patients (90%) completed the study. After 12 weeks, sibutramine-treated patients lost significantly more weight than placebo-treated patients: mean weight reductions were 4.2 kg (4.5%) in the sibutramine group vs 0.3 kg (0.4%) in the placebo group (P<0.001). Greater weight reduction on sibutramine was accompanied by trends for greater mean reductions in serum triglycerides and very low density lipoprotein cholesterol. Sibutramine was well tolerated, and most adverse events were mild or moderate in severity. No sibutramine patient discontinued treatment because of an adverse event. Mean supine and standing DBP and SBP were not statistically significantly different between the sibutramine group and the placebo group at any post-baseline visit during the 12-week trial. At week 12, mean increases from baseline supine SBP and DBP, respectively, were 1.6 and 1.7 mm Hg for the sibutramine group vs increases of 0.4 and 1.3 mm Hg for the placebo group. At week 12, mean increases from baseline standing SBP and DBP, respectively, were 1.5 and 1.8 mm Hg for the sibutramine group vs an increase of 0.3 and a decrease of 0.8 mm Hg for the placebo group (P > 0.05 for treatment comparison). A statistically significant mean increase of 5.6 bpm (+/-8.25, s.d.) in supine PR from a baseline of 62 bpm was reported in sibutramine-treated patients at week 12, whereas placebo-treated patients had a mean supine PR decrease of 2.2 bpm (+/-6.43) (P < 0.001). In summary, sibutramine was well tolerated and effective in weight reduction. The addition of sibutramine did not result in an increase in BP in obese patients whose hypertension was well controlled by a beta-blocker. However, based on the potential for changes in BP and PR, obese patients being treated with sibutramine should be monitored periodically for changes in BP and PR and managed appropriately.

Short-term comparison of once- versus twice-daily administration of glimepiride in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the metabolic effects and frequency of adverse events with 6 mg of glimepiride, a new oral sulfonylurea, given both in once- and twice-daily dosages to patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This 15-week study involved 161 subjects with NIDDM. Subjects were randomized into two groups. For 4 weeks, group 1 received glimepiride 3 mg twice daily, and group 2 received glimepiride 6 mg once daily. After a 3-week placebo-washout period, twice- and once-daily regimens were crossed over for a second 4-week treatment period. Subjects were hospitalized at the end of each placebo or active-treatment phase. Their glucose concentrations were recorded at 20 time points over a 24-hour period, and their insulin and C-peptide concentrations were recorded at 16 time points over the same period. Parameters that were calculated included fasting, 24-hour, and postprandial concentrations of glucose, insulin, and C-peptide. RESULTS: One hundred six patients were randomized to receive treatment; 94 completed the entire study. Existing physiologic mechanisms of glucose control were apparently unimpaired by glimepiride treatment. Insulin concentrations increased more during the postprandial glucose peaks than when subjects were fasting. Both twice- and once-daily regimens proved equally effective in reducing concentrations of fasting, postbreakfast, postlunch, and postdinner plasma glucose. Twenty-four-hour mean glucose concentrations showed a slightly greater decrease from baseline for the twice-daily regimen; the difference between the regimens was statistically significant but not clinically meaningful. The incidence of adverse events with glimepiride approximated that obtained with placebo, with both groups reporting only one adverse event, headache, in more than 5% of the subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Glimepiride is equally effective whether administered once or twice daily. Glimepiride seems to stimulate insulin production primarily after meals, when plasma glucose concentrations are highest, but controls blood glucose throughout the day.