Compassionate Use of Cefiderocol as Adjunctive Treatment of Native Aortic Valve Endocarditis Due to Extremely Drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Serious infections such as endocarditis due to extremely drug-resistance gram-negative bacteria are an increasing challenge. Here, we present successful adjunctive use of cefiderocol for a patient with persistently bacteremic healthcare-associated native aortic valve endocarditis due to an extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-positive Pseudomonas aeruginosa susceptible in vitro only to colistin, following failure of conventional therapeutic options.

Efficacy of Mirogabalin (DS-5565) on Patient-Reported Pain and Sleep Interference in Patients with Diabetic Neuropathic Pain: Secondary Outcomes of a Phase II Proof-of-Concept Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of mirogabalin on patient-reported pain and sleep interference in diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP). SUBJECTS: Adults (≥18 years) with type 1 or 2 diabetes, glycosylated hemoglobin of 10% or less at screening, and DPNP for six months or more were eligible for participation. METHODS: Subjects (N = 452) were randomly assigned (2:1:1:1:1:1:1) to receive placebo, dose-ranging mirogabalin (5, 10, 15, 20, 30 mg/day), or pregabalin (300 mg/day) for five weeks. Secondary efficacy end points studied here included patient global impression of change (PGIC), modified brief pain inventory (BPI), and average daily sleep interference score (ADSIS). Correlation plots were generated to examine the relationship between ADSIS and average daily pain score (ADPS). RESULTS: At week 5, significant reductions in ADSIS were observed in the mirogabalin 15, 20, and 30 mg/day groups, compared with placebo (P < 0.05). Baseline ADSIS and ADPS were strongly correlated (R2 = 0.4407), as were mean changes from baseline in ADSIS and ADPS at week 5 (R2 = 0.6694). The mirogabalin 30 mg/day group showed significant improvement compared with placebo in four of six BPI subscales at end point; the mirogabalin 15 mg/day group showed significant improvement in three of six BPI subscales (P < 0.05). At end of treatment, the percentage of subject with PGIC status of "much improved or better" was greater in all mirogabalin dose groups than in the placebo group (P < 0.05). A low incidence of treatment-related adverse events was reported for mirogabalin. CONCLUSIONS: Results support the effectiveness of mirogabalin in improving patient-reported pain and sleep interference in DPNP.

Extended-Release Calcifediol: A Data Journey From Phase 3 Studies to Real-world Evidence Highlights the Importance of Early Treatment of Secondary Hyperparathyroidism.

BACKGROUND: Early secondary hyperparathyroidism (SHPT) diagnosis and treatment are crucial to delay the progression of SHPT and related complications, in particular, cardiovascular events and bone fractures. Extended-release calcifediol (ERC) has been developed for the treatment of SHPT in patients with stage 3/4 chronic kidney disease (CKD) and vitamin D insufficiency (VDI). SUMMARY: This review compares baseline characteristics and treatment responses of SHPT patients receiving ERC in Phase 3 studies with those treated with ERC in a real-world study. Mean ± standard deviation baseline parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels were 147 ± 56 pg/mL and 148 ± 64 pg/mL in the Phase 3 ERC cohorts, and 181 ± 98 pg/mL in the real-world study. Other baseline laboratory parameters were consistent between the clinical and real-world studies. ERC treatment increased 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] and significantly reduced PTH levels, regardless of baseline CKD stage, in all studies. In the pooled Phase 3 per-protocol populations, 74% of the ERC cohort were up-titrated to 60 µg/day after 12 weeks at 30 µg/day, 97% attained 25(OH)D levels ≥30 ng/mL, and 40% achieved ≥30% PTH reduction. Despite a much lower rate of uptitration in the real-world study, 70% of patients achieved 25(OH)D levels ≥30 ng/mL, and 40% had a ≥30% reduction in PTH. KEY MESSAGES: These data establish a 'continuum' of clinical and real-world evidence of ERC effectiveness for treating SHPT, irrespective of CKD stage, baseline PTH levels, and ERC dose. This evidence supports early treatment initiation with ERC, following diagnosis of SHPT, VDI, and stage 3 CKD, to delay SHPT progression.

The mirogabalin ALDAY phase 3 program in pain associated with fibromyalgia: the lessons learned.

Aims: The main aim of this work was to identify and to share the lessons learned from the negative outcome of the mirogabalin ALDAY phase 3 clinical program in pain associated with fibromyalgia. These lessons are important to improve planning and design of future phase 3 programs in fibromyalgia.Methods: A systematic review from Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, clinicaltrials.gov, pharmaceutical companies, and regulatory agencies' websites, was carried out starting from the development of gabapentin, the first α2δ ligand studied for the treatment of neuropathic pain and ending with the mirogabalin program.Results: Based on the outcome of the main fibromyalgia programs, several differences in design, primary endpoint choice, magnitude of placebo response, presence of an active comparator, and size of the entire clinical program were identified. This analysis focused on the negative primary results of the mirogabalin ALDAY program and found several contributing factors. Above all, the magnitude of placebo response and the unprecedented size of the program were identified. The number of study visits and procedures was also high and highly demanding on all subjects involved in ALDAY.Outcome: In terms of main lessons learned from ALDAY, the first was the need for a comprehensive patient-focused strategy to preliminarily identify the challenges of fibromyalgia based on patient perspective and study complexity. Second, there was a need for a harmonized, truly patient-centric, global regulatory guidance accepted by regulatory agencies. Third, ALDAY proved that a phase 2 proof of concept, dose ranging study is necessary before commencing any phase 3 program in fibromyalgia.

Efficacy and safety of mirogabalin for the treatment of fibromyalgia: results from three 13-week randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled, parallel-group studies and a 52-week open-label extension study.

Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of mirogabalin, an α2δ ligand, in patients with fibromyalgia (FM). Methods: In three 13-week, multicenter, double-blind, phase 3 studies (studies A, B, and C), patients with FM (n = 1293, 1270, and 1301, respectively) were randomized (1:1:1:1) to placebo, pregabalin 150 mg twice daily, mirogabalin 15 mg once daily or mirogabalin 15 mg twice daily. The primary endpoint was the change in weekly average daily worst pain score (ADPS) at week 13. Key secondary endpoints included Patient Global Impression of Change and change in the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire total score. Long-term safety of mirogabalin was assessed in a 52-week extension study. Results: Neither mirogabalin dose demonstrated a significant ADPS reduction from baseline vs. placebo at week 13 in any of the three studies. Pregabalin significantly reduced ADPS from baseline vs. placebo in studies B and C (p = .0008 and .0001, respectively). The effect of mirogabalin compared with placebo on key secondary endpoints was variable across the studies. Mirogabalin was well tolerated by most patients in the phase 3 studies; no unexpected adverse events occurring during the 52-week extension study. Conclusion: While both mirogabalin doses were well tolerated by most patients and showed potential for reducing pain associated with FM, the primary endpoint of significant pain reduction in patients on mirogabalin compared with placebo was not achieved in any of the three randomized controlled studies. Clinical trial registration: NCT02146430; NCT02187159; NCT02187471; and NCT02234583 (extension study).

Retrospective analysis of rosiglitazone and macular oedema in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Macular oedema tends to be a more rapid complication of diabetic retinopathy and represents the major cause of blindness. Among subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus, it can be found in 15% of those who use insulin and 4% of those who do not. Use of thiazolidinediones (glitazones) has recently been associated with some cases of macular oedema. METHODS: We recalled 102 diabetic subjects treated with rosiglitazone to our diabetes centre in order to evaluate a possible association of this drug with macular oedema. Of these 102 subjects, we evaluated all 76 who provided written informed consent to participate in the analysis. All of these underwent a battery of four diagnostic tests: (1) visual acuity, (2) Amsler visual field test, (3) Ishihara colour recognition test, and (4) retinal fundus photography. All retinal photographs were examined by two experienced ophthalmologists. RESULTS: The most noticeable result was that most subjects (80%) had satisfactory visual acuity. The Ishihara test chart showed that three subjects were colour blind, but this abnormality was already known. On the Amsler test, one subject had a positive result consisting of visual distortion of a series of straight lines. In the retinal photos, two expert ophthalmologists independently identified one case of 'paramacular oedema' in a subject with diabetes of long duration with a proliferative retinopathy. The patient developed bilateral macular oedema during treatment with rosiglitazone 8 mg/day. The patient had been diagnosed with diabetes at the age of 45 years and after a period of 6 years taking oral antihyperglycaemic agents had been switched to insulin, up to four injections per day (total 60-70 IU/day), for the next 15 years. In 2000 a routine examination demonstrated the presence of sustained hypertension and the patient was started on an ACE inhibitor. A computerized test for autonomic neuropathy demonstrated abnormal deep breathing and lying-to-standing responses. Treatment with rosiglitazone was interrupted and the subject underwent a series of retinal photocoagulations for proliferative retinopathy. Two months after rosiglitazone therapy had been discontinued, the visual acuity of the patient reversed to baseline values. CONCLUSION: The study shows that rosiglitazone was not linked to formation of macular oedema, with the exception of one case of bilateral and clinically reversible paramacular oedema, where rosiglitazone was given in co-administration with a long-term insulin treatment regimen in a subject with pre-existing diabetic retinopathy. This patient had a long duration of diabetes and had also been hypertensive since 2000.

An Assessment of Clinically Important Differences on the Worst Pain Severity Item of the Modified Brief Pain Inventory in Patients with Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathic Pain.

Objectives: Using patient global impression of change (PGIC) as an anchor, an approximately 30% reduction on an 11-point numeric pain intensity rating scale (PI-NRS) is considered a clinically important difference (CID) in pain. Our objective was to define the CID for another pain measure, the worst pain severity (WPS) item of the modified Brief Pain Inventory (m-BPI). Methods: In this post hoc analysis of a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study, 452 randomized patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP) were followed over 5 weeks, with m-BPI data collected weekly and PGIC at treatment conclusion. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves (via logistic regression) were used to determine the changes in the m-BPI-WPS score that best predicted ordinal clinical improvement thresholds (i.e., "minimally improved" or better) on the PGIC. Results: Similar to the PI-NRS, a change of -3 (raw) or -33.3% from the baseline on the m-BPI-WPS optimized prediction for the "much improved" or better PGIC threshold and represents a CID. There was a high correspondence between observed and predicted PGIC categories at each PGIC threshold (ROC AUCs were 0.78-0.82). Conclusions: Worst pain on the m-BPI may be used to assess clinically important improvements in DPNP studies. Findings require validation in larger studies.

Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, Safety, and Tolerability of Mirogabalin When Coadministered With Lorazepam, Zolpidem, Tramadol, or Ethanol: Results From Drug-Drug Interaction Studies in Healthy Subjects.

Four randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 4-period drug-drug interaction studies were conducted in healthy subjects to evaluate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic (PD) interactions between mirogabalin and commonly used central nervous system depressants. Mirogabalin or placebo was administered alone or with single-dose lorazepam, zolpidem, tramadol, ethanol, or interacting drug placebo. Safety was assessed and serial samples for pharmacokinetic parameters were collected for up to 48 hours postdose. PD assessments included body sway (except tramadol), digit symbol substitution test, vertigo symptom scale short form, brief ataxia rating scale, and the Bond and Lader visual analog scale. Coadministration of mirogabalin with any of the 4 drugs did not cause any clinically relevant pharmacokinetic interactions. Peak mirogabalin concentration decreased by 28% (least squares mean ratio, 0.72; 90% confidence interval, [CI] 0.67, 0.76) following tramadol coadministration, and increased by 20% (least squares mean ratio, 1.20; 90%CI, 1.12, 1.28) following ethanol coadministration. Mirogabalin alone had little to no effect on PD parameters, but coadministration of mirogabalin with either lorazepam or ethanol increased the PD effects in body sway and digit symbol substitution test assays. Mirogabalin/lorazepam and mirogabalin/zolpidem increased occurrence of somnolence. Increased incidence of nausea and headache was noted with mirogabalin/tramadol and mirogabalin/ethanol, respectively.

Effect of rosiglitazone on endothelial function and inflammatory markers in patients with the metabolic syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of rosiglitazone on endothelial function and inflammatory markers in patients with the metabolic syndrome. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial. One hundred subjects (54 men and 46 women) with the metabolic syndrome, as defined by the Adult Treatment Panel III, were followed for 12 months after random assignment to rosiglitazone (4 mg/day) or placebo. Primary end points were flow-mediated dilation and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels; secondary end points were lipid and glucose parameters, homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) of insulin sensitivity, endothelial function score, and circulating levels of interleukin (IL)-6, IL-18, and adiponectin. RESULTS: Compared with 60 control subjects matched for age and sex, patients with the metabolic syndrome had decreased endothelial function, raised concentrations of inflammatory markers, and reduced insulin sensitivity. After 12 months, subjects with the metabolic syndrome receiving rosiglitazone showed improved flow-mediated vasodilation (4.2%, P < 0.001) and reduced hs-CRP levels (-0.7 mg/dl, P = 0.04), compared with the placebo group. Moreover, HOMA (-0.8, P = 0.01) and serum concentrations of IL-6 (-0.5 pg/ml, P = 0.045) and IL-18 (-31 pg/ml, P = 0.036) were significantly reduced in subjects receiving rosiglitazone, whereas adiponectin levels showed a significant increment (2.3 microg/ml, P = 0.02). High-density lipoprotein-cholesterol levels increased more and triglyceride levels decreased more in the rosiglitazone group compared with the placebo group. At 1 year of follow-up, 30 subjects receiving rosiglitazone still had features of the metabolic syndrome, compared with 45 subjects receiving placebo (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Rosiglitazone might be effective in reducing the prevalence of the metabolic syndrome.

Population pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation for assessing renal impairment effect on the pharmacokinetics of mirogabalin.

A population pharmacokinetic model was developed to describe plasma concentrations of mirogabalin and lactam metabolite, obtained following a single oral dose of 5 mg mirogabalin to subjects with varying degrees of renal function.A 2-compartment model was used for both mirogabalin and lactam metabolite. Body weight was a significant covariate on volume of distribution of mirogabalin and lactam metabolite, whereas creatinine clearance significantly affected both renal and nonrenal clearance of mirogabalin. The total clearance of mirogabalin was decreased by 25%, 54%, and 76% in subjects with mild, moderate, and severe renal impairment, respectively, relative to normal controls. Simulation results showed that in comparison with the normal renal function group receiving mirogabalin 15 mg once or twice daily, dose reduction by 50% or 75% in subjects with moderate or severe renal impairment would produce similar AUCss values, but 37%-43% or 28%-32% lower Cmax,ss of mirogabalin. Predicted mirogabalin AUCss was 26% higher, whereas Cmax,ss was similar in subjects with mild renal impairment compared with those having normal renal function taking the same dose. Results support a dose reduction by 50% or 75% in subjects with moderate or severe renal impairment. No dose adjustment seemed necessary for subjects with mild renal impairment.

Exposure-response modeling of average daily pain score, and dizziness and somnolence, for mirogabalin (DS-5565) in patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain.

Mirogabalin (DS-5565) is an α2δ-1 ligand being developed for pain associated with diabetic peripheral neuropathy, fibromyalgia, and postherpetic neuralgia. Nonlinear mixed-effects analyses were performed on average daily pain and on the incidence of the adverse events dizziness and somnolence. These models were used to predict the dose of mirogabalin equivalent to pregabalin and the probability of meaningful reduction in pain compared with placebo and pregabalin. In addition, regimen effects were evaluated for reductions of adverse events. Mirogabalin was estimated to be 17-fold more potent than pregabalin. The effectiveness of 150 mg pregabalin, dosed twice daily, attenuated by week 5. Therefore, the estimated mechanism-based equivalent dose (ED) of 17.7 mg mirogabalin was higher than that predicted to achieve comparable pain reduction. If attenuation of the pregabalin effect is real, mirogabalin doses lower than the ED could yield comparable pain reduction, albeit with less differentiation in pain from placebo. The incidence rate of dizziness and somnolence decreased over time. Twice-daily dosing of mirogabalin was predicted to yield a lower incidence rate of dizziness than once-daily dosing; thus, titration of dosages should reduce adverse event rates. These model results were used to influence phase 3 dosing selection.

Efficacy and safety of mirogabalin (DS-5565) for the treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain: a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active comparator-controlled, adaptive proof-of-concept phase 2 study.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify doses of mirogabalin (DS-5565) providing clinically meaningful efficacy with manageable side effects for treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Adults (≥18 years) with type 1 or 2 diabetes, HbA1c ≤10% at screening, and DPNP for ≥6 months were eligible for study participation. Subjects (n = 452) were randomized (2:1:1:1:1:1:1 ratio) to placebo, dose-ranging mirogabalin (5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 mg/day), or pregabalin (300 mg/day) for 5 weeks. The primary end point was weekly change in average daily pain score (ADPS; 0 to 10 numeric rating scale) from baseline to week 5 (minimally meaningful effect, ≥1.0-point decrease versus placebo). ANCOVA was conducted using last observation carried forward, and treatment effect least squares (LS) means were provided for each contrast. Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs), clinical laboratory tests, and electrocardiograms. RESULTS: LS mean differences in change in ADPS from baseline to week 5 versus placebo were -0.22, -0.53, -0.94, -0.88, and -1.01 for the mirogabalin 5-, 10-, 15-, 20-, and 30-mg/day treatment groups, respectively, and -0.05 in the pregabalin group (P < 0.05 versus placebo for mirogabalin 15, 20, and 30 mg/day). Most frequent AEs (n = 277) were primarily mild to moderate dizziness (9.4%), somnolence (6.1%), and headache (6.1%); otherwise, mirogabalin was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Mirogabalin 15, 20, and 30 mg/day had statistically significant reductions in ADPS versus placebo, and mirogabalin 30 mg/day also met the criteria of minimally meaningful effect. Mirogabalin may be a promising new treatment option for patients with DPNP.

Diabetic macular edema: correlations with available diabetes therapies--evidence across a qualitative review of published literature from MEDLINE and EMBASE.

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is the leading cause of visual loss and legal blindness in people with diabetes mellitus. The pathogenesis of DME is complex and multifactorial, and involves both local and systemic risk factors that may alter the blood-retina barrier and allow leakage of protein and fluid into the macula. Recently, in addition to well known risk factors, the use of thiazolidinediones (glitazones) has been related to the development and worsening of DME. This review is based on available literature derived from EMBASE and MEDLINE, from 1950 to May 2010, and focuses on the potential correlations between DME and current available therapies for type 1 and 2 diabetes. This review reveals that the current literature, with the potential exception of glitazones, is not sufficient for a definite statement on the association between DME and currently available diabetic therapies. In fact, among antidiabetic agents, the class of glitazones appears the only one to be potentially associated with DME. Furthermore, adequately powered, prospective studies are warranted to evaluate the exact causal association between glitazones and DME and to exclude the role of other confounding factors potentially able to induce or exacerbate macular edema. Improvement of the quality and reporting in postmarketing surveillance and the use of the 'dechallenge and rechallenge' approach in case of suspicious cause/effect drug relationship of DME are highly encouraged.

A 26-week, placebo- and pioglitazone-controlled, dose-ranging study of rivoglitazone, a novel thiazolidinedione for the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the efficacy and general safety of rivoglitazone, a novel thiazolidinedione, as a treatment for type 2 diabetes in a dose-ranging study over a period of up to 6 months. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A 26-week, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo- and active comparator (pioglitazone 45 mg)-controlled study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of once-daily rivoglitazone 1, 2, or 3 mg in subjects with type 2 diabetes. The study was conducted in adults with type 2 diabetes (glycated hemoglobin [HbA(1c)] >or=7.0% and <10.5%) who were either naïve to prior antidiabetes drug treatment or discontinued pre-study antidiabetes medications and were switched to study medication. A total of 441 subjects were randomized, using an equal allocation schedule to one of five treatment arms, including placebo. The primary efficacy measurement was the change in HbA(1c) from baseline to week 26 in the intent-to-treat population (last observation carried forward), for drug treatments minus placebo (placebo-subtracted). CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00143520. RESULTS: The incidence of early discontinuations was >50%, with most cases being related to a lack of efficacy (highest on placebo) or adverse experiences (highest on rivoglitazone 3 mg). Rivoglitazone 1, 2, and 3 mg and pioglitazone 45 mg were more effective than placebo in reducing HbA(1c) from baseline to week 26 (placebo-subtracted change from baseline: -0.55% [p = 0.0034], -0.99% [p < 0.0001], -1.10% [p < 0.0001], and -0.59% [p = 0.0016], respectively). In general, all treatments were safe. The most common drug-related adverse events reported with rivoglitazone were peripheral edema and weight gain; incidences increased with dose and were higher with rivoglitazone 2 and 3 mg than with pioglitazone or rivoglitazone 1 mg. CONCLUSIONS: Rivoglitazone is a potent thiazolidinedione agent with demonstrated glycemic benefits over a 6-month period in subjects with type 2 diabetes. Once-daily doses of 1, 2, and 3 mg rivoglitazone demonstrated HbA(1c) reduction similar or superior to those observed for pioglitazone 45 mg. Limitations in generalizing from this study include a modest sample size and a high rate of discontinuation prior to the last scheduled visit.