Effect of fezolinetant on sleep disturbance and impairment during treatment of vasomotor symptoms due to menopause.

OBJECTIVES: To analyse the effect of fezolinetant on patient-reported sleep disturbance and impairment in individuals with vasomotor symptoms (VMS) using pooled data from the SKYLIGHT 1 and 2 studies. STUDY DESIGN: The SKYLIGHT studies were phase-3, double-blind investigations. Individuals (≥40-≤65 years) who were assigned female at birth and seeking treatment of/relief from moderate-to-severe VMS were enrolled. Participants were randomised to receive placebo, fezolinetant 30 mg, or fezolinetant 45 mg during a 12-week treatment period. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sleep assessments: Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Sleep Disturbance - Short Form 8b (PROMIS SD SF 8b), PROMIS Sleep-Related Impairment - Short Form 8a (PROMIS SRI SF 8a), and Patient Global Impression of Change/Severity in SD (PGI-C SD and PGI-S SD). Assessments were completed at baseline (except PGI-C SD), weeks 4 and 12. RESULTS: Overall, 1022 individuals were randomised and took ≥1 dose of study drug. PROMIS SD SF 8b results showed that improvements in sleep disturbance were observed for fezolinetant 30 and 45 mg versus placebo (week 12, least squares [LS] mean differences: -0.6 [95 % confidence interval [CI]: -1.7, 0.4] for 30 mg and -1.5 [-2.5, -0.5] for 45 mg). Similar improvements in sleep impairment were reported using the PROMIS SRI SF 8a (week 12, LS mean differences: -1.1 [95 % CI: -2.1, -0.1] for 30 mg and -1.3 [-2.3, -0.3] for 45 mg). For PGI-C SD at week 12, 33.6 % (98/292 participants) of the placebo group felt much/moderately better versus 40.1 % (110/274) and 51.0 % (154/302) of the fezolinetant 30 mg and 45 mg groups, respectively. For PGI-S SD at week 12, 44.0 % (129/293) of the placebo group had severe/moderate problems versus 41.1 % (113/275) and 36.6 % (111/303) of the fezolinetant 30 mg and 45 mg groups, respectively. The 12-week timeframe for this analysis was limited by the length of the placebo-controlled period. CONCLUSIONS: Fezolinetant had a beneficial effect on four measures of sleep disturbance and impairment following treatment for VMS.

Treating moderate-to-severe menopausal vasomotor symptoms with fezolinetant: analysis of responders using pooled data from two phase 3 studies (SKYLIGHT 1 and 2).

OBJECTIVES: The aims of the study were to further characterize the efficacy of fezolinetant for the treatment of moderate-to-severe vasomotor symptoms (VMS) due to menopause using responder analysis and to investigate whether efficacy, not adjusted for placebo, resulted in clinically meaningful within-patient change. METHODS: This prespecified analysis used pooled data from two phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (SKYLIGHT 1 and 2). Responders were those experiencing ≥50%, ≥75%, ≥90%, or 100% reduction in VMS frequency from baseline to weeks 4 and 12. Responder analysis was performed for patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures to evaluate participants achieving a clinically meaningful within-patient change (not placebo adjusted) at week 4 and 12 versus baseline. Single responders were based on outcomes of VMS frequency, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Sleep Disturbance-Short Form 8b Total Score, Menopause-Specific Quality of Life (MENQoL) Total Score, and MENQoL VMS Domain Score. Double and triple responder analyses combined VMS frequency plus one or more of the PRO. Patient Global Impression of Change VMS was deemed a suitable anchor measure for meaningful within-patient change in VMS frequency. RESULTS: A greater proportion of fezolinetant-treated versus placebo-treated participants had ≥50%, ≥75%, ≥90%, or 100% reduction in VMS frequency from baseline to weeks 4 and 12. A greater proportion of responders were observed in the fezolinetant groups versus placebo at week 12 in all four single responder analyses. In the double and triple responder analyses, odds ratios were supportive of a beneficial effect for both doses of fezolinetant versus placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Fezolinetant was associated with significantly higher within-patient clinically meaningful improvement in important PRO, including VMS frequency, PROMIS SD SF 8b Total Score, MENQoL Total Score, and MENQoL VMS Domain Score.

Fezolinetant treatment of moderate-to-severe vasomotor symptoms due to menopause: effect of intrinsic and extrinsic factors in two phase 3 studies (SKYLIGHT 1 and 2).

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the efficacy of the neurokinin 3 receptor antagonist, fezolinetant, according to several intrinsic (individual related) and extrinsic (external influence) factors that may influence the frequency and severity of moderate-to-severe vasomotor symptoms (VMS) using pooled 12-week data from SKYLIGHT 1 and 2. METHODS: SKYLIGHT 1 and 2 were two phase 3, randomized, double-blind studies conducted from July 2019 to August 2021 (SKYLIGHT 1) or April 2021 (SKYLIGHT 2). Participants were initially randomized to receive daily doses of placebo, fezolinetant 30 mg, or fezolinetant 45 mg. After 12 weeks, placebo participants were rerandomized to receive fezolinetant 30 mg or 45 mg, whereas those receiving fezolinetant continued on the same dose. Change in VMS frequency from baseline to week 12 was used to assess efficacy according to several intrinsic and extrinsic factors. Overall efficacy and safety were also investigated. RESULTS: Overall, 1,022 individuals were included. Fezolinetant was efficacious in reducing VMS frequency across all intrinsic and extrinsic factors. Efficacy was most notable for participants who self-identify as Black (least squares mean difference for fezolinetant 45 mg versus placebo, -3.67; 95% CI, -5.32 to -2.01), current smokers (-3.48; -5.19 to -1.77), and current alcohol users (-3.48; -4.42 to -2.54). Overall efficacy was -2.51 (95% CI, -3.20 to -1.82) for fezolinetant 45 mg versus placebo. Similar findings were observed for the fezolinetant 30 mg dose. Comparable incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events were observed for placebo (132 of 342 individuals [38.6%]), fezolinetant 30 mg (132 of 340 individuals [38.8%]), and fezolinetant 45 mg (135 of 340 individuals [39.7%]). CONCLUSIONS: None of the intrinsic and extrinsic factors analyzed substantially reduced the efficacy response to fezolinetant in SKYLIGHT 1 and 2. These data provide additional confidence for using fezolinetant in a diverse population of individuals with VMS.

Fezolinetant impact on health-related quality of life for vasomotor symptoms due to the menopause: Pooled data from SKYLIGHT 1 and SKYLIGHT 2 randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of fezolinetant treatment on health-related quality of life using pooled data from SKYLIGHT 1 and 2 studies. DESIGN: Prespecified pooled analysis. SETTING: USA, Canada, Europe; 2019-2021. POPULATION: 1022 women aged ≥40 to ≤65 years with moderate-to-severe vasomotor symptoms (VMS; minimum average seven hot flushes/day), seeking treatment for VMS. METHODS: Women were randomised to 12-week double-blind treatment with once-daily placebo or fezolinetant 30 or 45 mg. Completers entered a 40-week, active extension (those receiving fezolinetant continued that dose; those receiving placebo re-randomised to fezolinetant received 30 or 45 mg). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean changes from baseline to weeks 4 and 12 on Menopause-Specific Quality of Life (MENQoL) total and domain scores, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire specific to VMS (WPAI-VMS) domain scores, Patient Global Impression of Change in VMS (PGI-C VMS); percentages achieving PGI-C VMS of 'much better' (PGI-C VMS responders). Mean reduction was estimated using mixed model repeated measures analysis of covariance. RESULTS: Fezolinetant 45 mg mean reduction over placebo in MENQoL total score was -0.57 (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.75 to -0.39) at week 4 and -0.47 (95% CI -0.66 to -0.28) at week 12. Reductions were similar for 30 mg. MENQoL domain scores were also reduced and WPAI-VMS scores improved. Twice as many women receiving fezolinetant reported VMS were 'much better' than placebo based on PGI-C VMS assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Fezolinetant treatment was associated with improvement in overall QoL, measured by MENQoL, and work productivity, measured by WPAI-VMS. A high proportion receiving fezolinetant felt VMS were 'much better' based on PGI-C VMS responder analysis.

Fezolinetant for treatment of moderate-to-severe vasomotor symptoms associated with menopause (SKYLIGHT 1): a phase 3 randomised controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Neurokinin 3 receptor antagonists are potential non-hormonal therapies for the treatment of vasomotor symptoms in menopausal women as options are scarce for those who cannot or do not want to take hormone therapy. Fezolinetant is one of the first non-hormonal neurokinin 3 receptor antagonists in development for the treatment of vasomotor symptoms due to menopause. This study investigated the safety and efficacy of fezolinetant for the treatment of moderate-to-severe vasomotor symptoms associated with menopause. METHODS: SKYLIGHT 1 is a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 12-week, phase 3 trial with a 40-week active treatment extension. This trial was done at 97 facilities across the USA, Canada, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Spain, and the UK. Women aged 40-65 years with an average of seven or more moderate-to-severe hot flashes per day were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to once-daily exact-matched placebo, fezolinetant 30 mg, or fezolinetant 45 mg. Randomisation was done using a web-based interactive response system and investigators, project team members, clinical staff, and participants were masked to treatment assignment. Coprimary endpoints were mean change in frequency and severity of vasomotor symptoms from baseline to weeks 4 and 12. The efficacy and safety analyses comprised all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04003155) and is completed. FINDINGS: Between July 11, 2019, and Aug 11, 2021, 2205 women were recruited of whom 175 were assigned to placebo, 176 to fezolinetant 30 mg, and 176 to fezolinetant 45 mg (175 in the placebo group, 174 in the fezolinetant 30 mg group, and 173 in the fezolinetant 45 mg received at least one dose [safety analysis set]). One participant randomly assigned to fezolinetant 45 mg received fezolinetant 30 mg in error, so the efficacy analysis set (full analysis set) consisted of 173 in the fezolinetant 30 mg group and 174 in the fezolinetant 45 mg group. 23 participants in the placebo group, 31 in the fezolinetant 30 mg group, and 13 in the fezolinetant 45 mg group discontinued treatment before week 12, mostly due to adverse events or participant withdrawal. Compared with placebo, fezolinetant 30 mg and fezolinetant 45 mg significantly reduced the frequency of vasomotor symptoms at week 4 (difference in change in least squares mean -1·87 [SE 0·42; p<0·001], -2·07 [SE 0·42; p<0·001]) and week 12 (-2·39 [SE 0·44; p<0·001], -2·55 [SE 0·43; p<0·001]). Compared with placebo, fezolinetant 30 mg and 45 mg significantly reduced the severity of vasomotor symptoms at week 4 (-0·15 [0·06; p=0·012], -0·19 [0·06; p=0·002]) and week 12 (-0·24 [0·08; p=0·002], -0·20 [0·08; p=0·007]). Improvements in frequency and severity of vasomotor symptoms were observed after 1 week and maintained over 52 weeks. During the first 12 weeks, treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 65 (37%) of 174 women in the fezolinetant 30 mg group, 75 (43%) of 173 in the fezolinetant 45 mg group, and 78 (45%) of 175 in the placebo group. The incidence of liver enzyme elevations was low (placebo n=1; fezolinetant 30 mg n=2; fezolinetant 45 mg n=0) and these events were generally asymptomatic, transient, and resolved while on treatment or after treatment discontinuation. INTERPRETATION: Data support the clinical use of fezolinetant as a non-hormonal treatment for vasomotor symptoms associated with menopause. The study was placebo-controlled for 12 weeks followed by a 40-week blinded extension to assess the maintenance of effect. Furthermore, the population studied was diverse and representative of the potential target population for fezolinetant therapy. Further characterisation of the benefit of fezolinetant on quality of life, including on symptoms of mood and sexual wellbeing, merits investigation. FUNDING: Astellas Pharma.

Safety of Fezolinetant for Vasomotor Symptoms Associated With Menopause: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety, tolerability, and effect of fezolinetant on endometrial health over 52 weeks. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, 52-week safety study (SKYLIGHT 4 [Study to Find Out How Safe Long-term Treatment With Fezolinetant is in Women With Hot Flashes Going Through Menopause]) of placebo, fezolinetant 30 mg, and fezolinetant 45 mg once daily (1:1:1). Participants were postmenopausal and seeking treatment for vasomotor symptoms associated with menopause. Primary endpoints were treatment-emergent adverse events, percentage of participants with endometrial hyperplasia, and percentage with endometrial malignancy. Endometrial hyperplasia or malignancy was evaluated according to U.S. Food and Drug Administration guidance (point estimate of 1% or less with an upper bound of one-sided 95% CI of 4% or less). Secondary endpoints included change in bone mineral density (BMD) and trabecular bone score. A sample size of 1,740 was calculated to enable observation of one or more events (≈80% probability for events with background rate of less than 1%). RESULTS: A total of 1,830 participants were randomized and took one or more medication dose (July 2019-January 2022). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 64.1% (391/610) of the placebo group, 67.9% (415/611) of the fezolinetant 30-mg group, and 63.9% (389/609) of the fezolinetant 45-mg group. Treatment-emergent adverse events leading to discontinuation were similar across groups (placebo, 26/610 [4.3%]; fezolinetant 30 mg, 34/611 [5.6%]; fezolinetant 45 mg, 28/609 [4.6%]). Endometrial safety was assessed in 599 participants. In the fezolinetant 45-mg group, 1 of 203 participants had endometrial hyperplasia (0.5%; upper limit of one-sided 95% CI 2.3%); there were no cases in the placebo (0/186) or fezolinetant 30 mg (0/210) group. Endometrial malignancy occurred in 1 of 210 in the fezolinetant 30-mg group (0.5%; 95% CI 2.2%) with no cases in the other groups. Liver enzyme elevations more than three times the upper limit of normal occurred in 6 of 583 placebo, 8 of 590 fezolinetant 30 mg, and 12 of 589 fezolinetant 45 mg participants; no Hy's law cases were reported (ie, no severe drug-induced liver injury with alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase more than three times the upper limit of normal and total bilirubin more than two times the upper limit of normal, with no elevation of alkaline phosphatase and no other reason to explain the combination). Changes in BMD and trabecular bone score were similar across groups. CONCLUSION: Results from SKYLIGHT 4 confirm the 52-week safety and tolerability of fezolinetant and support its continued development. FUNDING SOURCE: Astellas Pharma Inc. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04003389.

Efficacy and Safety of Fezolinetant in Moderate to Severe Vasomotor Symptoms Associated With Menopause: A Phase 3 RCT.

CONTEXT: Vasomotor symptoms (VMS) are common, bothersome, and can persist for years before and after menopause. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess efficacy/safety of fezolinetant for treatment of moderate to severe VMS associated with menopause. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, 12-week phase 3 trial with a 40-week active treatment extension (NCT04003142; SKYLIGHT 2), women aged 40 to 65 years with minimum average 7 moderate to severe VMS/day were randomized to 12 weeks of once-daily placebo, fezolinetant 30 mg, or fezolinetant 45 mg. Completers were rerandomized to fezolinetant 30/45 mg for 40 additional weeks. Coprimary efficacy endpoints were mean daily change from baseline to week 4 (W4) and W12 in VMS frequency and severity. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: Both fezolinetant doses statistically significantly reduced VMS frequency/severity at W4 and W12 vs placebo. For VMS frequency, W4 least squares mean (SE) reduction vs placebo: fezolinetant 30 mg, -1.82 (0.46; P < .001); 45 mg, -2.55 (0.46; P < .001); W12: 30 mg, -1.86 (0.55; P < .001); 45 mg, -2.53 (0.55; P < .001). For VMS severity, W4: 30 mg, -0.15 (0.06; P < .05); 45 mg, -0.29 (0.06; P < .001); W12: 30 mg, -0.16 (0.08; P < .05); 45 mg, -0.29 (0.08; P < .001). Improvement in VMS frequency and severity was observed by W1 and maintained through W52. Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were infrequent, reported by 2%, 1%, and 0% of those receiving fezolinetant 30 mg, fezolinetant 45 mg, and placebo, respectively. CONCLUSION: Daily fezolinetant 30 and 45 mg were efficacious and well tolerated for treating moderate to severe VMS associated with menopause.

Qualitative study: burden of menopause-associated vasomotor symptoms (VMS) and validation of PROMIS Sleep Disturbance and Sleep-Related Impairment measures for assessment of VMS impact on sleep.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the impact of menopause-associated vasomotor symptoms (VMS) on sleep. We also sought to establish the content validity of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) short form Sleep-Related Impairment and Sleep Disturbance measures in postmenopausal women with moderate to severe VMS. METHODS: Cross-sectional, in-person, qualitative interviews were conducted in the United States (Texas, Illinois) and European Union (UK, France) with women aged 40-64 years experiencing moderate to severe VMS (≥35/wk). Main outcomes were impact of VMS on sleep based on concept elicitation and content validity of PROMIS Sleep-Related Impairment and Sleep Disturbance short forms via cognitive debriefing. RESULTS: Thirty-two women (US: n = 16; EU: n = 16) participated. A majority (US: 93.8%; EU: 93.8%) said VMS affected sleep; specifically, they had sleep interrupted by sweating or overheating and had difficulty returning to sleep. Sleep disturbance was the most bothersome aspect of VMS (US: 75%; EU: 50%). VMS-associated sleep disturbance affected next-day work productivity, mood, relationships, daily activities, concentration, social activities, and physical health. Participants found both PROMIS sleep measures relevant and easy to answer; the Sleep Disturbance measure was considered the most relevant. Participants had no difficulty remembering their experiences over the 7-day recall period and found the response options to be distinct. CONCLUSION: VMS associated with menopause significantly interferes with sleep and next-day functioning (e.g., work productivity), supporting assessment of sleep outcomes in studies evaluating treatment of VMS. Women with moderate to severe VMS found that the PROMIS Sleep-Related Impairment and Sleep Disturbance short forms assessed constructs important to understanding sleep in the context of menopause-associated VMS.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of fidaxomicin for the treatment of Clostridioides (Clostridium) difficile infection in Japan.

BACKGROUND: The cost of treating Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI), particularly recurrent disease, is high. In clinical trials, fidaxomicin has been associated with significantly lower recurrence rates and higher sustained cure rates versus vancomycin. The high acquisition cost of fidaxomicin has limited its acceptance into clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of fidaxomicin versus vancomycin in patients with CDI after failure of metronidazole in the Japanese healthcare setting. METHODS: Clinical results from three phase III trials and inputs based on assumptions validated by clinical experts in Japan were used in a semi-Markov model with 1-year time horizon. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for fidaxomicin versus vancomycin were expressed as cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and interpreted using willingness-to-pay thresholds of JPY 5,000,000 (primary) and JPY 7,500,000 (secondary) per QALY gained in Japan. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses and scenario analyses were performed. RESULTS: Higher drug acquisition costs for fidaxomicin were partially offset by lower hospitalization costs driven by fewer recurrences, lower costs of complications, and fewer general practitioner visits versus vancomycin. The ICER for fidaxomicin versus vancomycin was estimated at JPY 5,715,183 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analyses showed a 46% probability of fidaxomicin being cost-effective versus vancomycin at a willingness-to-pay threshold of JPY 5,000,000 per QALY gained. At a threshold of JPY 7,500,000, there was a 54% probability of fidaxomicin being cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Fidaxomicin treatment in patients with CDI following failure of metronidazole improves health outcomes with partial offset of higher drug acquisition costs versus vancomycin.

Fidaxomicin compared with vancomycin and metronidazole for the treatment of Clostridioides (Clostridium) difficile infection: A network meta-analysis.

We conducted a systematic review of the literature and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the relative effectiveness of antibiotic treatments for Clostridioides (Clostridium) difficile infection (CDI) including vancomycin (VCM), metronidazole (MTZ) and fidaxomicin (FDX). Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) including adults with any severity of CDI that was treated with VCM, MTZ or FDX. The NMA was performed using a Bayesian framework, using a fixed-effects model. The searches identified seven publications for inclusion, which provided five RCTs for VCM versus MTZ, and three RCTs for FDX versus VCM. The NMA showed that for clinical cure rate, there was no difference for FDX versus VCM, and there was a significant difference in favour of FDX versus MTZ (odds ratio [OR]: 1.77; 95% credible interval [CrI] 1.11, 2.83]). For recurrence rate, there was a significant difference in favour of FDX versus both VCM (OR: 0.50; 95% CrI: 0.37, 0.68) and MTZ (OR: 0.44; 95% CrI: 0.27, 0.72). For sustained cure (clinical cure without recurrence), there was a significant difference in favour of FDX versus VCM (OR: 1.61; 95% CrI: 1.27, 2.05) and MTZ (OR: 2.39; 95% CrI: 1.65, 3.47). These findings suggest that FDX and VCM are effective first-line treatments for mild or moderate CDI, whereas MTZ is not, and FDX may be more effective at preventing CDI recurrence than VCM.

The Symptoms and Impact of Recurrent Focal Segmental Glomerulosclerosis in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Conceptual Model of the Patient Experience.

INTRODUCTION: We qualitatively examined the symptoms and impact of recurrent primary focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (rpFSGS) in kidney transplant recipients, compared with two related FSGS populations, to characterize the experience of patients with rpFSGS. METHODS: A literature review identified 58 articles concerning the experience of patients with pFSGS and/or rpFSGS in three groups: pre-transplant pFSGS, post-transplant rpFSGS, or post-transplant non-recurrent pFSGS. Literature findings were used to construct a preliminary conceptual model incorporating the symptoms and impact of rpFSGS, which was refined on the basis of qualitative interviews with clinicians. Twenty-five patients (rpFSGS: n = 15; pre-transplant pFSGS: n = 5; post-transplant non-recurrent pFSGS: n = 5) were interviewed to characterize the experience of patients with rpFSGS and compare it with other FSGS populations, and findings were used to finalize the conceptual model. RESULTS: The impact of pFSGS/rpFSGS described in the literature was diverse. Treatment-related symptoms, along with anxiety and depression, were considered important features of rpFSGS in addition to the findings from the literature review, according to clinicians. Patient-reported tiredness and swelling were the most common/disturbing symptoms associated with rpFSGS, while physical activity restrictions and adverse effects on work/social life were considered the most profound impact concepts. The collective disease experience was different for patients with rpFSGS and non-recurrent pFSGS, although psychological impact, including treatment-related anxiety and depression, were common to both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Post-transplant recipients with rpFSGS display a greater symptom burden and experience a more diverse impact than those with non-recurrent pFSGS, highlighting the importance of effective patient monitoring and introducing effective treatments for the prevention and management of pFSGS recurrence. FUNDING: Astellas Pharma Global Development, Inc.

Neuropathic pain: A patient-centred approach to measuring outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Neuropathic pain (NP) is a complex, chronic pain state initiated by a primary lesion or dysfunction of the nervous system and presents as a variety of symptoms across multiple disease states. OBJECTIVE: To develop a patient-centred conceptual model of symptoms and impacts in subjects with diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) or post-herpetic neuralgia (PHN) that can inform the measurement strategy in clinical trials. METHOD: Thirty subjects with DPN or PHN participated in in-person interviews which were performed until saturation was achieved. Transcripts were analysed in ATLAS.ti. RESULTS: Interviews were completed with DPN subjects (United States, n = 10; Japan, n = 10) and PHN subjects (United States, n = 5; Japan, n = 5). Numbness and tingling were frequently reported symptoms in the DPN population while itchiness and hypersensitivity were predominant in PHN. Both populations experienced burning and ache/soreness with similar frequency. DPN subjects experienced pain primarily in their lower extremity (eg feet, ankles), while PHN subjects experienced pain primarily in the chest and back. Impacts reported by DPN subjects included difficulty walking, sleep disturbance and climbing stairs. Impacts in PHN subjects included sleep disturbance, avoidance of physical contact, being angry/frustrated and being sad/depressed. Overall, concepts in Japan were not qualitatively different from the United States. Conceptual models of NP were generated based on the concepts elicited. CONCLUSIONS: This research highlights core concepts to measure from the patient's perspective. Moreover, it enables the assessment of existing measures, the possible modification of these measures, or if a new NP measure with improved sensitivity and responsiveness is merited.

A Retrospective, Single-Center Comparative Cost Analysis of OnabotulinumtoxinA and AbobotulinumtoxinA for Cervical Dystonia Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Chemodenervation with botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) is recommended as first-line treatment for the management of cervical dystonia. The choice of BoNT for treatment is subject to the consideration of several factors, including cost. OBJECTIVE: To compare the costs incurred by patients and payers for onabotulinumtoxinA (ONA) or abobotulinumtoxinA (ABO) for the treatment of cervical dystonia. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, noninterventional closed cohort study of cervical dystonia patients within a single U.S. private neurological practice. Patient and payer incurred costs from medical billing records for patients satisfying inclusion and exclusion criteria treated from November 1, 2009, through January 1, 2013, were de-identified and included in the analysis. Forty-seven patients initially treated with at least 3 consecutive cycles of ONA, followed by at least 3 consecutive cycles of ABO were included, representing 282 injection cycles available for analysis. Patients were required to have had a positive response to treatment with both agents and no concomitant treatment with BoNT for any other condition during the analysis period. The analysis compared the primary endpoint of median overall payer and patient incurred costs reimbursed to the clinic under each treatment regimen. For the purposes of this cost analysis, comparable clinical outcomes on both therapies was assumed.   RESULTS: Switching from ONA to ABO resulted in an overall incurred reimbursement cost savings for payers and patients. Median costs per injection cycle for ONA were $1,925 ($0-$2,814) compared with $1,214 ($229-$2,899; P less than 0.0001) for ABO, representing an approximate 37% reduction in incurred reimbursement costs inclusive of toxin and procedure. Overall toxin reimbursement costs, patient out-of-pocket toxin costs, and the cost of unavoidable waste were also lower when patients were treated with ABO.  CONCLUSIONS: For patients treated for cervical dystonia, switching from ONA to ABO resulted in payer and patient reimbursement cost reductions in a single U.S. private practice with outcomes assumed to be similar.

Cethromycin versus clarithromycin for community-acquired pneumonia: comparative efficacy and safety outcomes from two double-blinded, randomized, parallel-group, multicenter, multinational noninferiority studies.

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) continues to be a major health challenge in the United States and globally. Factors such as overprescribing of antibiotics and noncompliance with dosing regimens have added to the growing antibacterial resistance problem. In addition, several agents available for the treatment of CAP have been associated with serious side effects. Cethromycin is a new ketolide antibiotic that may provide prescribing physicians with an additional agent to supplement a continually limited armamentarium. Two global phase III noninferiority studies (CL05-001 and CL06-001) to evaluate cethromycin safety and efficacy were designed and conducted in patients with mild to moderate CAP. Study CL05-001 demonstrated an 83.1% clinical cure rate in the cethromycin group compared with 81.1% in the clarithromycin group (95% confidence interval [CI], -4.8%, +8.9%) in the intent to treat (ITT) population and a 94.0% cethromycin clinical cure rate compared with a 93.8% clarithromycin cure rate (95% CI, -4.5%, +5.1%) in the per protocol clinical (PPc) population. Study CL06-001 achieved an 82.9% cethromycin clinical cure rate in the ITT population compared with an 88.5% clarithromycin cure rate (95% CI, -11.9%, +0.6%), whereas the clinical cure rate in the PPc population was 91.5% in cethromycin group compared with 95.9% in clarithromycin group (95% CI, -9.1%, +0.3%). Both studies met the primary endpoints for clinical cure rate based on predefined, sliding-scale noninferiority design. Therefore, in comparison with clarithromycin, these two noninferiority studies demonstrated the efficacy and safety of cethromycin, with encouraging findings of efficacy in subjects with Streptococcus pneumoniae bacteremia. No clinically significant adverse events were observed during the studies. Cethromycin may be a potential oral therapy for the outpatient treatment of CAP.