Mavacamten in Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Referred for Septal Reduction: Week 56 Results From the VALOR-HCM Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: There is an unmet need for novel medical therapies before recommending invasive therapies for patients with severely symptomatic obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). Mavacamten has been shown to improve left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) gradient and symptoms and may thus reduce the short-term need for septal reduction therapy (SRT). Objective: To examine the cumulative longer-term effect of mavacamten on the need for SRT through week 56. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, randomized clinical trial with placebo crossover at 16 weeks, conducted from July 2020 to November 2022. Participants were recruited from 19 US HCM centers. Included in the trial were patients with obstructive HCM (New York Heart Association class III/IV) referred for SRT. Study data were analyzed April to August 2023. Interventions: Patients initially assigned to mavacamten at baseline continued the drug for 56 weeks, and patients taking placebo crossed over to mavacamten from week 16 to week 56 (40-week exposure). Dose titrations were performed using echocardiographic LVOT gradient and LV ejection fraction (LVEF) measurements. Main Outcome and Measure: Proportion of patients undergoing SRT, remaining guideline eligible or unevaluable SRT status at week 56. Results: Of 112 patients with highly symptomatic obstructive HCM, 108 (mean [SD] age, 60.3 [12.5] years; 54 male [50.0%]) qualified for the week 56 evaluation. At week 56, 5 of 56 patients (8.9%) in the original mavacamten group (3 underwent SRT, 1 was SRT eligible, and 1 was not SRT evaluable) and 10 of 52 patients (19.2%) in the placebo crossover group (3 underwent SRT, 4 were SRT eligible, and 3 were not SRT evaluable) met the composite end point. A total of 96 of 108 patients (89%) continued mavacamten long term. Between the mavacamten and placebo-to-mavacamten groups, respectively, after 56 weeks, there was a sustained reduction in resting (mean difference, -34.0 mm Hg; 95% CI, -43.5 to -24.5 mm Hg and -33.2 mm Hg; 95% CI, -41.9 to -24.5 mm Hg) and Valsalva (mean difference, -45.6 mm Hg; 95% CI, -56.5 to -34.6 mm Hg and -54.6 mm Hg; 95% CI, -66.0 to -43.3 mm Hg) LVOT gradients. Similarly, there was an improvement in NYHA class of 1 or higher in 51 of 55 patients (93%) in the original mavacamten group and in 37 of 51 patients (73%) in the placebo crossover group. Overall, 12 of 108 patients (11.1%; 95% CI, 5.87%-18.60%), which represents 7 of 56 patients (12.5%) in the original mavacamten group and 5 of 52 patients (9.6%) in the placebo crossover group, had an LVEF less than 50% (2 with LVEF ≤30%, one of whom died), and 9 of 12 patients (75%) continued treatment. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this randomized clinical trial showed that in patients with symptomatic obstructive HCM, mavacamten reduced the need for SRT at week 56, with sustained improvements in LVOT gradients and symptoms. Although this represents a useful therapeutic option, given the potential risk of LV systolic dysfunction, there is a continued need for close monitoring. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04349072.

Dose-Blinded Myosin Inhibition in Patients With Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Referred for Septal Reduction Therapy: Outcomes Through 32 Weeks.

BACKGROUND: Septal reduction therapy (SRT) in patients with intractable symptoms from obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (oHCM) is associated with variable morbidity and mortality. The VALOR-HCM trial (A Study to Evaluate Mavacamten in Adults with Symptomatic Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Who Are Eligible for Septal Reduction Therapy) examined the effect of mavacamten on the need for SRT through week 32 in oHCM. METHODS: A double-blind randomized placebo-controlled multicenter trial at 19 US sites included patients with oHCM on maximal tolerated medical therapy referred for SRT with left ventricular outflow tract gradient ≥50 mm Hg at rest or provocation (enrollment, July 2020-October 2021). The group initially randomized to mavacamten continued the drug for 32 weeks, and the placebo group crossed over to dose-blinded mavacamten from week 16 to week 32. Dose titrations were based on investigator-blinded echocardiographic assessment of left ventricular outflow tract gradient and left ventricular ejection fraction. The principal end point was the proportion of patients proceeding with SRT or remaining guideline eligible at 32 weeks in both treatment groups. RESULTS: From the 112 randomized patients with oHCM, 108 (mean age, 60.3 years; 50% men; 94% in New York Heart Association class III/IV) qualified for week 32 evaluation (56 in the original mavacamten group and 52 in the placebo cross-over group). After 32 weeks, 6 of 56 patients (10.7%) in the original mavacamten group and 7 of 52 patients (13.5%) in the placebo cross-over group met SRT guideline criteria or elected to undergo SRT. After 32 weeks, a sustained reduction in resting left ventricular outflow tract gradient (-33.0 mm Hg [95% CI, -41.1 to -24.9]) and Valsalva left ventricular outflow tract gradient (-43.0 mm Hg [95% CI, -52.1 to -33.9]) was observed in the original mavacamten group. A similar reduction in resting (-33.7 mm Hg [95% CI, -42.2 to -25.2]) and Valsalva (-52.9 mm Hg [95% CI, -63.2 to -42.6]) gradients was quantified in the cross-over group after 16 weeks of mavacamten. After 32 weeks, improvement by ≥1 New York Heart Association class was observed in 48 of 53 patients (90.6%) in the original mavacamten group and 35 of 50 patients (70%) after 16 weeks in the cross-over group. CONCLUSIONS: In severely symptomatic patients with oHCM, 32 weeks of mavacamten treatment showed sustained reduction in the proportion proceeding to SRT or remaining guideline eligible, with similar effects observed in patients who crossed over from placebo after 16 weeks. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT04349072.

Myosin Inhibition and Left Ventricular Diastolic Function in Patients With Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Referred for Septal Reduction Therapy: Insights From the VALOR-HCM Study.

BACKGROUND: In the randomized phase 3 VALOR-HCM study (A Study to Evaluate Mavacamten in Adults With Symptomatic Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Who Are Eligible for Septal Reduction Therapy) of patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, mavacamten reduced the need for septal reduction therapy. Because mavacamten improves ventricular compliance, this sub-study examined the effects of treatment with this cardiac myosin inhibitor on diastolic function. METHODS: Symptomatic obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients on maximally tolerated medical therapy referred for septal reduction therapy were randomized 1:1 to mavacamten or placebo. At baseline and week 16, a resting and stress echocardiogram was performed with interpretation by a core laboratory. In this exploratory substudy, the principal end point was the change in parameters used to define the grade of diastolic function in patients treated with mavacamten and placebo. A related objective was to assess the proportion of patients with an improvement in diastolic function grade. A secondary aim was to assess for correlation between diastolic function parameters and the secondary end points from VALOR-HCM: New York Heart Association class, quality of life, and cardiac biomarkers. RESULTS: Diastolic dysfunction grade was evaluable in 98 patients at baseline and week 16. Among patients treated with mavacamten, 29.4% (15 of 51) demonstrated improvement in diastolic function grade compared with 12.8% (6 of 47) patients with placebo (P=0.05). Average E/e' ratio decreased significantly in patients treated with mavacamten (-3.4±5.3) compared with placebo (0.57±3.5; P<0.001). Indexed left atrial volumes (mL/m2) also decreased significantly in patients who received mavacamten (-5.2±7.8) compared with placebo (-0.51±8.1; P=0.005). After adjustment for change in left ventricular outflow tract gradient and mitral regurgitation, mavacamten was significantly associated with a decrease in average E/e' ratio and indexed left atrial volumes. Change in average E/e' ratio was significantly correlated with the secondary end points from VALOR-HCM. CONCLUSIONS: In this exploratory substudy, after 16 weeks of therapy, mavacamten improved diastolic function, and this change correlated with improvement in clinical and biomarker end points. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT04349072.

Myosin Inhibition in Patients With Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Referred for Septal Reduction Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Septal reduction therapy (SRT), surgical myectomy or alcohol ablation, is recommended for obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (oHCM) patients with intractable symptoms despite maximal medical therapy, but is associated with morbidity and mortality. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine whether the oral myosin inhibitor mavacamten enables patients to improve sufficiently to no longer meet guideline criteria or choose to not undergo SRT. METHODS: Patients with left ventricular (LV) outflow tract (LVOT) gradient ≥50 mm Hg at rest/provocation who met guideline criteria for SRT were randomized, double blind, to mavacamten, 5 mg daily, or placebo, titrated up to 15 mg based on LVOT gradient and LV ejection fraction. The primary endpoint was the composite of the proportion of patients proceeding with SRT or who remained guideline-eligible after 16 weeks' treatment. RESULTS: One hundred and twelve oHCM patients were enrolled, mean age 60 ± 12 years, 51% men, 93% New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class III/IV, with a mean post-exercise LVOT gradient of 84 ± 35.8 mm Hg. After 16 weeks, 43 of 56 placebo patients (76.8%) and 10 of 56 mavacamten patients (17.9%) met guideline criteria or underwent SRT, difference (58.9%; 95% CI: 44.0%-73.9%; P < 0.001). Hierarchical testing of secondary outcomes showed significant differences (P < 0.001) favoring mavacamten, mean differences in post-exercise peak LVOT gradient -37.2 mm Hg; ≥1 NYHA functional class improvement 41.1%; improvement in patient-reported outcome 9.4 points; and NT-proBNP and cardiac troponin I between-groups geometric mean ratio 0.33 and 0.53. CONCLUSIONS: In oHCM patients with intractable symptoms, mavacamten significantly reduced the fraction of patients meeting guideline criteria for SRT after 16 weeks. Long-term freedom from SRT remains to be determined. (A Study to Evaluate Mavacamten in Adults With Symptomatic Obstructive HCM Who Are Eligible for Septal Reduction Therapy [VALOR-HCM]; NCT04349072).

Study design and rationale of VALOR-HCM: evaluation of mavacamten in adults with symptomatic obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy who are eligible for septal reduction therapy.

BACKGROUND: Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a primary myocardial disorder which frequently leads to symptoms such as dyspnea and exercise intolerance, often due to severe dynamic left ventricular outflow tract obstruction (LVOTO). Current guideline-recommended pharmacotherapies have variable therapeutic responses to relieve LVOTO. In recent phases 2 and 3, clinical trials for symptomatic obstructive HCM (oHCM), mavacamten, a small molecule inhibitor of ß-cardiac myosin has been shown to improve symptoms, exercise capacity, health status, reduce LVOTO, along with having a beneficial impact on cardiac structure and function. METHODS: VALOR-HCM is designed as a multicenter (approximately 20 centers in United States) phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study. The study population consists of approximately 100 patients (≥18 years old) with symptomatic oHCM who meet 2011 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association and/or 2014 European Society of Cardiology HCM-guideline criteria and are eligible and willing to undergo septal reduction therapy (SRT). The study duration will be up to 138 weeks, including an initial 2-week screening period, followed by16 weeks of placebo-controlled treatment, 16 weeks of active blinded treatment, 96 weeks of long-term extension, and an 8-week posttreatment follow-up visit. The primary endpoint will be a composite of the decision to proceed with SRT prior to or at Week 16 or remain guideline eligible for SRT at Week 16. Secondary efficacy endpoints will include change (from baseline to Week 16 in the mavacamten group vs placebo) in postexercise LVOT gradient, New York Heart Association class, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire clinical summary score, NT-proBNP, and cardiac troponin. Exploratory endpoints aim to characterize the effect of mavacamten on multiple aspects of oHCM pathophysiology. CONCLUSIONS: In severely symptomatic drug-refractory oHCM patients meeting guideline criteria of eligibility for SRT, VALOR-HCM will primarily study if a 16-week course of mavacamten reduces or obviates the need for SRT using clinically driven endpoints.

Prevalence of cardiovascular disease and major risk factors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a multinational cross-sectional study.

To compare the prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and major CVD risk factors among rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients enrolled in a large US and multinational registry. We compared CVD and CVD risk factor prevalence from 11 countries enrolled in the CORRONA US and CORRONA International registries; patients from the 10 ex-US participating countries were grouped by region (Eastern Europe, Latin America, and India). Unadjusted summary data were presented for demographics and disease characteristics; comparisons for prevalence of CVD risk factors and CVD were age/gender standardized to the age/gender distribution of the US enrolled patients. Overall, 25,987 patients were included in this analysis. Compared to patients from the ex-US regions, US participants had longer disease duration and lower disease activity, yet were more likely to receive a biologic agent. Additionally, CORRONA US participants had the highest body mass index (BMI). Enrolled patients in India had the lowest BMI, were more rarely smokers, and had a low prevalence of hyperlipidemia, hypertension, and prior CVD compared to the US and other ex-US regions. Participants from Eastern Europe had a higher prevalence of hypertension and hyperlipidemia and highest prevalence of all manifestations of CVD. Differences in the prevalence of both CVD and major CVD risk factors were observed across the four regions investigated. Observed differences may be influenced by variations in both non-modifiable/modifiable characteristics of patient populations, and may contribute to heterogeneity on the observed safety of investigational and approved therapies in studies involving RA patients from different origins.

Review of Routine Laboratory Monitoring for Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Receiving Biologic or Nonbiologic DMARDs.

Safety concerns associated with many drugs indicated for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) can be attenuated by the early identification of toxicity through routine laboratory monitoring; however, a comprehensive review of the recommended monitoring guidelines for the different available RA therapies is currently unavailable. The aim of this review is to summarize the current guidelines for laboratory monitoring in patients with RA and to provide an overview of the laboratory abnormality profiles associated with each drug indicated for RA. Recommendations for the frequency of laboratory monitoring of serum lipids, liver transaminases, serum creatinine, neutrophil counts, and platelet counts in patients with RA were compiled from a literature search for published recommendations and guidelines as well as the prescribing information for each drug. Laboratory abnormality profiles for each drug were compiled from the prescribing information for each drug and a literature search including meta-analyses and primary clinical trials data.

Incidence of Gastrointestinal Perforations in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Treated with Tocilizumab from Clinical Trial, Postmarketing, and Real-World Data Sources.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to use multiple data sources to update information on gastrointestinal perforations (GIPs) during tocilizumab (TCZ) treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Reporting rates of GIP events were estimated from three distinct patient data sets: a TCZ-IV RA clinical trial all-exposure population, a global TCZ postmarketing safety database population, and a US healthcare claims database population of patients with RA, including patients who received TCZ, anti-tumor necrosis factor (aTNF) agents, or abatacept. RESULTS: The clinical trial, global postmarketing, and healthcare claims populations provided 17,906, 382,621, and 3268 patient-years (PYs) of TCZ exposure, respectively. GIP incidence rates [95% confidence interval (CI)] were 1.9 (1.3-2.7), 1.2 (1.1-1.3), and 1.8 (0.7-4.0; specific definition) to 2.8 (1.3-5.2; sensitive definition) per 1000 PYs for the clinical trial, postmarketing, and healthcare claims populations, respectively. The GIP incidence rate (95% CI) for the comparator aTNF healthcare claims population ranged from 0.6 (0.3-1.2) to 0.9 (0.5-1.5) per 1000 PYs, for an absolute rate difference between TCZ and aTNFs of 1.2 (-0.3 to 2.5) to 1.9 (0.0-3.7) per 1000 PYs, corresponding to a number needed to harm between 533 and 828. CONCLUSION: The TCZ GIP event rates from multiple data sources were consistent with previously reported rates, did not increase over time, and were significantly associated with the number of prior biologics. Comparison of GIP incidence rates among patients with prior biologic exposure suggests that, for every 1000 patients treated with TCZ per year, an additional 1-2 GIP events might occur compared with patients treated with aTNFs. FUNDING: Roche.

Efficacy and safety of budesonide administered by pressurized metered-dose inhaler in children with asthma.

BACKGROUND: Budesonide is approved for delivery using a nebulized solution and dry-powder inhaler, but its use through a pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) in pediatric patients with asthma has not been determined. OBJECTIVE: To examine the efficacy and safety of 160 µg twice daily of budesonide through a pMDI vs placebo in children 6 to younger than 12 years with asthma and a demonstrated need for inhaled corticosteroids. METHODS: A 6-week, international, multicenter, double-blinded, parallel-group, phase 2 study randomized 304 pediatric patients (mean age, 9 years; 21.7% <8 years) 1:1 to 160 µg (80 µg × 2 inhalations) twice daily of budesonide through a pMDI or placebo after a 7- to 21-day run-in period. The primary efficacy end point was change from baseline in morning peak expiratory flow (PEF); safety end points included adverse events, vital signs, and discontinuations. RESULTS: Budesonide treatment significantly improved morning PEF vs placebo; mean treatment effect (budesonide vs placebo) was 13.6 L/min (P < .0001). Budesonide also showed significant improvements vs placebo for forced expiratory volume in 1 second, evening PEF, forced expiratory flow at 25% to 75% of pulmonary volume, reliever medication use, nighttime awakenings, awakenings with reliever use, and percentage of patients with at least 15- and at least 30-L/min increase in morning PEF from baseline. The numbers of patients experiencing adverse events and discontinuations were smaller in the budesonide than in the placebo group. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Budesonide at 160 µg twice daily through a pMDI was generally well tolerated and significantly improved lung function, symptoms, rescue medication use, and nighttime awakenings vs placebo in children 6 to younger than 12 years with asthma and a demonstrated need for inhaled corticosteroids.

Using epidemiological registry data to provide background rates as context for adverse events in a rheumatoid arthritis drug development program: a coordinated approach.

PURPOSE: Observational studies can provide context for adverse events observed in clinical trials, especially for infrequent events or long-term risks. We developed methods to improve safety contextualization for a rheumatoid arthritis drug development program through coordinated analyses of multiple registries. METHODS: We identified and characterized differences and similarities across five registries (Swedish Rheumatology Quality of Care Register, Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America [CORRONA], Norfolk Arthritis Register, Institute of Rheumatology Rheumatoid Arthritis, and the new CORRONA International), harmonized outcome definitions, and investigated whether restricted subcohorts improved comparability with trial populations. To address confounding, we identified risk predictors for outcomes of interest (mortality, cardiovascular disease, infection, and malignancy). We used patient-level analyses at each registry and central analysis of standardized group-level data. RESULTS: Despite data differences, the coordinated approach enabled consistent variable definitions for key baseline characteristics and outcomes. Selection of restricted subcohorts (e.g., using active joint count criteria) improved baseline comparability with trial patients for some rheumatoid arthritis disease activity measures, but less for other characteristics (e.g., age and comorbidity); however, such selection decreased sample size considerably. For most outcomes, age was the most important risk predictor, emphasizing the importance of age/sex standardization to address confounding. The prospective approach enabled use of recent relevant data; the distributed analysis safeguarded confidentiality of registry data. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with reliance on published data alone, a forward-looking coordinated approach across multiple observational data sources can improve comparability and consistency and better support sensitivity analyses and data interpretation, in contextualizing safety data from clinical trials. This approach may have utility to support safety assessments across diverse diseases and drug development programs and satisfy future regulatory requirements.

Methodological Challenges When Comparing Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of International Observational Registries.

OBJECTIVE: Comparisons of data from different registries can be helpful in understanding variations in many aspects of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The study aim was to assess and improve the comparability of demographic, clinical, and comorbidity data from 5 international RA registries. METHODS: Using predefined definitions, 2 subsets of patients (main cohort and subcohort) from 5 international observational registries (Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America Registry [CORRONA], the Swedish Rheumatology Quality of Care Register [SRR], the Norfolk Arthritis Register [NOAR], the Institute of Rheumatology Rheumatoid Arthritis cohort [IORRA], and CORRONA International) were evaluated and compared. Patients ages >18 years with RA, and present in or recruited to the registry from January 1, 2000, were included in the main cohort. Patients from the main cohort with positive rheumatoid factor and/or erosive RA who had received ≥1 synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD), and switched to or added another DMARD, were included in the subcohort at time of treatment switch. RESULTS: Age and sex distributions were fairly similar across the registries. The percentage of patients with a high Disease Activity Score in 28 joints score varied between main cohorts (17.5% IORRA, 18.9% CORRONA, 24.7% NOAR, 27.7% CORRONA International, and 36.8% SRR), with IORRA, CORRONA, and CORRONA International including more prevalent cases of RA; the differences were smaller for the subcohort. Prevalence of comorbidities varied across registries (e.g., coronary artery disease ranged from 1.5% in IORRA to 7.9% in SRR), partly due to the way comorbidity data were captured and general cultural differences; the pattern was similar for the subcohorts. CONCLUSION: Despite different inclusion criteria for the individual RA registries, it is possible to improve the comparability and interpretability of differences across RA registries by applying well-defined cohort definitions.

A phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study of 2 dosing regimens of fostamatinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis with an inadequate response to a tumor necrosis factor-α antagonist.

OBJECTIVE: Our 24-week study (NCT01197755; OSKIRA-3) compared the efficacy and safety of fostamatinib versus placebo in patients taking background methotrexate treatment with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to a single tumor necrosis factor-α antagonist. METHODS: Adult patients were randomized (1:1:1) to fostamatinib [100 mg bid for 24 weeks (n=105; Group A)], or 100 mg bid for 4 weeks, then 150 mg qd (n=108; Group B), or to placebo (n=110; Group C) for 24 weeks. Nonresponders at Week 12 could enter a longterm extension study. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response at Week 24. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were well balanced. Significantly more patients in fostamatinib Group A (36.2%; p=0.004), but not B (27.8%; p=0.168), achieved ACR20 at Week 24 versus placebo (21.1%). Frequently reported adverse events were diarrhea, hypertension, and headache. Elevated blood pressure (≥140/90 mm Hg) at ≥1 visit was observed in 46.7%, 51.9%, and 26.6% of patients, respectively. There were 2 deaths in the study, 1 in Group B and 1 in the placebo group. CONCLUSION: Fostamatinib 100 mg bid, but not fostamatinib 100 mg bid for 4 weeks then 150 mg qd, achieved statistical improvements in ACR20 at 24 weeks versus placebo. Because of efficacy and safety results from the phase III clinical program, the companies developing fostamatinib have decided not to study it further in RA at this time.

Bronchodilator effect of single-dose formoterol administered by pressurized metered-dose inhaler in children with asthma aged 6 to <12 years receiving budesonide.

Dose-response of formoterol via pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) has not been determined in asthmatic pediatric patients aged 6 to <12 years. This study was designed to assess the bronchodilating dose-response of three formoterol pMDI doses in children with stable asthma aged 6 to <12 years receiving twice-daily (b.i.d.) budesonide 160 micrograms. A U.S., multicenter, five-way crossover study compared single doses of formoterol, a long-acting beta-agonist, via pMDI (2.25, 4.5, and 9 micrograms) or dry powder inhaler (12 micrograms; active comparator) and placebo, with a 3- to 14-day washout period between doses. Budesonide pMDI 160 micrograms, an inhaled corticosteroid, was given b.i.d. throughout the study. Fifty-four pediatric patients (mean age, 9.2 years; mean asthma history, 6.1 years) were randomized. All formoterol doses showed significantly higher average 12-hour forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1; area under the curve) versus placebo (primary efficacy). Formoterol pMDI 4.5 and 9 micrograms showed significantly greater average 12-hour FEV1 than formoterol 2.25 micrograms (p = 0.0007 and p = 0.0001, respectively). Formoterol also resulted in significant improvement in maximum FEV1 during the 12-hour treatment period (secondary efficacy) with formoterol 4.5-, 9-, and 12-microgram doses versus placebo and the formoterol 2.25-microgram dose. Bronchodilation was not maintained during the 12-hour dosing interval with formoterol 2.25 micrograms. No serious adverse events were reported. Formoterol pMDI showed generally dose-proportional pharmacokinetics to 9 micrograms, as determined by urinary excretion. Single doses of formoterol pMDI showed a dose-response, with formoterol 9 micrograms exhibiting a maximum response, in pediatric patients aged 6 to <12 years with persistent stable asthma maintained on b.i.d. budesonide pMDI 160 micrograms. Clinical trial NCT01136655, www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Long-term safety and asthma control measures with a budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler in African American asthmatic patients: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Information surrounding the long-term safety of combination inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß(2)-adrenergic agonist medications in African American asthmatic patients is limited. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess safety and asthma control with a budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) versus budesonide over 1 year in African American patients. METHODS: This 52-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter, phase 3B safety study (NCT00419952) was conducted in 742 self-reported African American patients 12 years or older with moderate-to-severe asthma previously receiving medium- to high-dose inhaled corticosteroids. After 2 weeks using a 320 µg twice-daily budesonide pMDI, patients were randomized 1:1 to 320/9 µg twice-daily budesonide/formoterol pMDI or 320 µg twice-daily budesonide pMDI. RESULTS: Both treatments were well tolerated. Asthma exacerbation incidence and rate (per patient-treatment year) were lower with budesonide/formoterol versus budesonide (incidence, 7.7% vs 14.0% [P= .006]; rate ratio, 0.615 [P= .002]). Time to first asthma exacerbation was longer (P= .018) with budesonide/formoterol versus budesonide. The most common adverse events, regardless of study drug relationship, were headache (9.5% and 7.7%), nasopharyngitis (6.9% and 8.0%), sinusitis (4.0% and 6.3%), and viral upper respiratory tract infection (5.8% and 4.4%) for budesonide/formoterol and budesonide, respectively. Serious adverse events occurred in 12 and 15 patients, respectively; none were considered drug related. No substantial or unexpected patterns of abnormalities were observed in laboratory, electrocardiographic, or Holter monitoring assessments. Hospitalization caused by asthma exacerbation occurred in 0 and 4 patients in the budesonide/formoterol and budesonide groups, respectively. Pulmonary function and asthma control measures generally favored budesonide/formoterol. CONCLUSIONS: In this population budesonide/formoterol pMDI was well tolerated over 12 months, with a safety profile similar to that of budesonide; the asthma exacerbation rate was reduced by 38.5% versus budesonide.

Test for Respiratory and Asthma Control in Kids (TRACK): clinically meaningful changes in score.

BACKGROUND: The Test for Respiratory and Asthma Control in Kids (TRACK) is the first validated questionnaire to assess respiratory and asthma control exclusively in young children. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the minimally important difference (MID) for interpreting meaningful changes in individual patients' TRACK scores. METHODS: In this prospective, nonrandomized, longitudinal study conducted at 20 US pediatric sites, TRACK was administered at 2 separate clinic visits (4-6 weeks apart) to caregivers of children aged less than 5 years with symptoms consistent with asthma. Anchor-based methods were used to determine the MID from mean score differences between patients based on multiple criteria measures: physician guidelines-based respiratory control rating, physician-recommended changes to therapy, episodes of symptoms lasting more than 24 hours in the past 3 months, oral corticosteroid use for respiratory tract illnesses in the past year, physician-assessed change in control status at follow-up, and caregiver-reported change in respiratory status. The MID also was determined from distribution-based methods. RESULTS: TRACK scores were assessed at baseline (426 caregivers) and follow-up (396 caregivers). Mean differences in TRACK scores between patients differing on criteria measures ranged from 3.4 to 16.4 points (mean, 11.1 points). Distribution-based techniques confirmed these findings. Based on logistic regression analyses, scoring 10 or more points less than 80 on TRACK was associated with an approximately 2-fold increased odds of having uncontrolled asthma or respiratory symptoms. CONCLUSION: Changes in TRACK scores of 10 or more points represent clinically meaningful changes in respiratory control status in individual young children with respiratory symptoms consistent with asthma and should alert health care providers to re-evaluate asthma management.

Longitudinal validation of the Test for Respiratory and Asthma Control in Kids in pediatric practices.

OBJECTIVE: The 5-item, caregiver-completed Test for Respiratory and Asthma Control in Kids (TRACK) was developed and validated primarily in asthma-specialist practices to monitor respiratory control in preschool-aged children. This longitudinal study in children treated by pediatricians evaluated the responsiveness of TRACK to changes in respiratory- and asthma-control status over time and further assessed TRACK's reliability and validity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Caregivers of children younger than 5 years with symptoms consistent with asthma within the past year (N = 438) completed TRACK at 2 clinic visits separated by 4 to 6 weeks. Physicians were blinded to caregiver assessment, completed a guidelines-based respiratory-control survey at both visits, and were asked whether the visit resulted in a change in therapy. Responsiveness of TRACK to change in respiratory-control status over time was evaluated; reliability and discriminant validity were assessed. RESULTS: Mean changes in TRACK scores from the initial to follow-up visits differed in the expected direction in subsets of children whose clinical status improved, remained unchanged, or worsened based on physicians' and caregivers' assessments (P < .001). Mean TRACK scores also differed significantly (P < .001) across patient subsets, with lower scores (indicating poorer control) in children classified as very poorly controlled, in those who required a step-up in therapy, and in those who had 4 or more episodes or attacks of wheezing, coughing, or shortness of breath per week in the past 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: The present study extends the validity and reliability of TRACK by demonstrating its responsiveness to change in respiratory-control status over time in preschool-aged children with symptoms consistent with asthma.

Can patients with asthma feel inhaler therapy working right away? Two clinical trials testing the effect of timing of assessment on patient perception.

BACKGROUND: Feeling a maintenance therapy work right away may provide positive reinforcement and may offer one way to improve adherence in patients with asthma. Precise measurement is required to accurately compare the presence of this effect across clinical trial treatment groups. METHODS: Two randomized, controlled studies tested whether timing of assessment (daily vs weekly, study 1; and predose vs postdose, study 2) influenced patients' reports of whether they can feel a medication working right away (perception), and their satisfaction with this perception (satisfaction). These 2-week US-based multicenter double-blind, parallel-group studies included patients > or = 18 years of age with mild to moderate persistent asthma. In each, patients were randomized to one of two drugs with different onset profiles: budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) 80/4.5 microg x 2 inhalations (160/9 microg) twice daily or budesonide pMDI 80 microg x 2 inhalations (160 microg) twice daily. Patients were further randomized to complete previously validated perception and satisfaction questions in a cross-over fashion, either daily and weekly (N = 123) or predose and postdose (N = 134). Patient surveys also assessed perceptions of the onset of effect of medication and their value of these perceptions. RESULTS: No significant differences were observed in patients' reports of perception, either daily versus weekly or predose versus postdose. A statistically significant difference in satisfaction was found in study 1 only, favoring weekly recall (p < 0.05), with sensitivity analysis showing no difference by treatment group (p = 0.162). Across both studies, most patients (87%) who perceived their inhaler working right away (136 of 157 patients) identified positive airway sensations. Most patients reported that feeling their medication work right away is reassuring and would help them manage their asthma. CONCLUSION: Assessment timing has no effect on patient response to the perception of feeling a medication working right away. Differences found in satisfaction levels reported with weekly versus daily recall were consistent across treatment groups, indicating that no bias was introduced in favor of either treatment group. Patients characterized the perception of feeling a maintenance therapy working right away as easier breathing and reported this perception as beneficial to patient self-care.

Test for respiratory and asthma control in kids (TRACK): a caregiver-completed questionnaire for preschool-aged children.

BACKGROUND: A validated questionnaire is needed to monitor respiratory control in preschool-aged children. OBJECTIVE: We sought to develop and validate a caregiver-completed questionnaire that measures respiratory control in young children. METHODS: A 33-item questionnaire that included asthma impairment and risk items was administered to 486 caregivers of children aged younger than 5 years with a current, recent, or past history of respiratory symptoms. Stepwise regression was used to select a subset of items with the greatest discriminant validity in relation to guidelines-defined asthma control in a random two-thirds development sample. Reliability, validity, and ability to screen for respiratory control problems were tested in development and validation samples (remaining one-third sample). RESULTS: The content of the 5 items selected, the Test for Respiratory and Asthma Control in Kids (TRACK), included frequency of respiratory symptoms (wheeze, cough, shortness of breath), activity limitation, and nighttime awakenings in the past 4 weeks; rescue medication use in the past 3 months; and oral corticosteroid use in the previous year. Reliability was greater than 0.70 in both samples. ANOVA showed that mean scores differed significantly (P < .001) in the expected direction across both samples for 3 levels of guidelines-based respiratory control, physician-recommended change in therapy, and symptom status. In the development and validation samples, screening analyses revealed areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.88 and 0.82, respectively; control status was correctly classified in 81% and 78% of cases. CONCLUSION: TRACK is a valid, easy-to-administer, caregiver-completed questionnaire of respiratory control in preschool-aged children with symptoms consistent with asthma.