Efficacy and safety of ritlecitinib in adults and adolescents with alopecia areata: a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 2b-3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Alopecia areata is characterised by non-scarring loss of scalp, face, or body hair. We investigated the efficacy and safety of ritlecitinib, an oral, selective dual JAK3/TEC family kinase inhibitor, in patients with alopecia areata. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 2b-3 trial done at 118 sites in 18 countries, patients aged 12 years and older with alopecia areata and at least 50% scalp hair loss were randomly assigned to oral ritlecitinib or placebo once-daily for 24 weeks, with or without a 4-week loading dose (50 mg, 30 mg, 10 mg, 200 mg loading dose followed by 50 mg, or 200 mg loading dose followed by 30 mg), followed by a 24-week extension period during which ritlecitinib groups continued their assigned doses and patients initially assigned to placebo switched to ritlecitinib 50 mg or 200 mg loading dose followed by 50 mg. Randomisation was done by use of an interactive response system and was stratified by baseline disease severity and age. The sponsor, patients, and investigators were masked to treatment, and all patients received the same number of tablets to maintain masking. The primary endpoint was Severity of Alopecia Tool (SALT) score 20 or less at week 24. The primary endpoint was assessed in all assigned patients, regardless of whether they received treatment. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03732807. FINDINGS: Between Dec 3, 2018, and June 24, 2021, 1097 patients were screened and 718 were randomly assigned to receive ritlecitinib 200 mg + 50 mg (n=132), 200 mg + 30 mg (n=130), 50 mg (n=130), 30 mg (n=132), 10 mg (n=63), placebo to 50 mg (n=66), or placebo to 200 mg + 50 mg (n=65). 446 (62%) of 718 patients were female and 272 (38%) were male. 488 (68%) were White, 186 (26%) were Asian, and 27 (4%) were Black or African American. Of 718 patients randomly assigned, 104 patients discontinued treatment (34 withdrew, 19 adverse events [AEs], 12 physician decision, 12 lack of efficacy, 13 lost to follow up, five rolled over to long-term study transfer, four pregnancies, two protocol deviations, one declined to attend follow-up due to COVID-19, one attended last visit very late due to COVID-19, and one non-compliance). At week 24, 38 (31%) of 124 patients in the ritlecitinib 200 mg + 50 mg group, 27 (22%) of 121 patients in the 200 mg + 30 mg group, 29 (23%) of 124 patients in the 50 mg group, 17 (14%) of 119 patients in the 30 mg group, and two (2%) of 130 patients in the placebo group had a response based on SALT score 20 or less. The difference in response rate based on SALT score 20 or less between the placebo and the ritlecitinib 200 mg + 50 mg group was 29·1% (95% CI 21·2-37·9; p<0·0001), 20·8% (13·7-29·2; p<0·0001) for the 200 mg + 30 mg group, 21·9% (14·7-30·2; p<0·0001) for the 50 mg group, and 12·8% (6·7-20·4; p=0·0002) for the 30 mg group. Up to week 48 and including the follow-up period, AEs had been reported in 108 (82%) of 131 patients in the ritlecitinib 200 mg + 50 mg group, 105 (81%) of 129 patients in the 200 mg + 30 mg group, 110 (85%) of 130 patients in the 50 mg group, 106 (80%) of 132 patients in the 30 mg group, 47 (76%) of 62 patients in the 10 mg group, 54 (83%) of 65 patients placebo to ritlecitinib 200 mg + 50 mg in the extension period, and 57 (86%) of 66 patients in the placebo to 50 mg group. The incidence of each AE was similar between groups, and there were no deaths. INTERPRETATION: Ritlecitinib was effective and well tolerated in patients aged 12 years and older with alopecia areata. Ritlecitinib might be a suitable treatment option for alopecia areata in patients who are candidates for systemic therapy. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Clinical experience with isavuconazole in healthy volunteers and patients with invasive aspergillosis in China, and the results from an exposure-response analysis.

BACKGROUND: Isavuconazole is a broad-spectrum triazole for the treatment of invasive fungal disease (IFD). OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical experience with isavuconazole in Chinese individuals. PATIENTS/METHODS: Participants were Chinese healthy volunteers from a Phase I pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety study of single/multiple doses of isavuconazole (n = 36) and Chinese patients from the global Phase III SECURE study that assessed safety and efficacy of isavuconazole vs voriconazole for IFD treatment (n = 26). RESULTS: No clinically relevant differences in PK were found between Chinese and Western participants, although exposure was increased in Chinese volunteers. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in 75.0% of healthy volunteers, many of which were infusion-related. No serious AEs were reported. In SECURE, findings in Chinese patients (n = 26) were similar to the global population. For patients who received ≥1 dose of study drug, allcause mortality from first dose to Day 42 was 10.0% (1/10) with isavuconazole and 25.0% (4/16) with voriconazole (treatment difference [95% confidence interval, CI]: -15.0% [-43.2%, 13.2%]). Overall response at the end of treatment for patients with proven/probable IFD was 25.0% and 16.7% with isavuconazole and voriconazole, respectively (treatment difference [95% CI] -8.3% [-60.2%, 43.5%]). Isavuconazole was associated with lower incidence of hepatobiliary, eye, skin, subcutaneous tissue and psychiatric disorders compared with voriconazole and lower incidence of treatment-related TEAEs, serious TEAES or death overall. CONCLUSIONS: Although further research is required, this study demonstrated a favourable risk-benefit profile of isavuconazole in Chinese patients.

Body-Weight Fluctuations and Outcomes in Coronary Disease.

BACKGROUND: Body-weight fluctuation is a risk factor for death and coronary events in patients without cardiovascular disease. It is not known whether variability in body weight affects outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease. METHODS: We determined intraindividual fluctuations in body weight from baseline weight and follow-up visits and performed a post hoc analysis of the Treating to New Targets trial, which involved assessment of the efficacy and safety of lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels with atorvastatin. The primary outcome was any coronary event (a composite of death from coronary heart disease, nonfatal myocardial infarction, resuscitated cardiac arrest, revascularization, or angina). Secondary outcomes were any cardiovascular event (a composite of any coronary event, a cerebrovascular event, peripheral vascular disease, or heart failure), death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. RESULTS: Among 9509 participants, after adjustment for risk factors, baseline lipid levels, mean body weight, and weight change, each increase of 1 SD in body-weight variability (measured according to average successive variability and used as a time-dependent covariate) was associated with an increase in the risk of any coronary event (2091 events; hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01 to 1.07; P=0.01), any cardiovascular event (2727 events; hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.07; P<0.001), and death (487 events; hazard ratio,1.09; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.12; P<0.001). Among patients in the quintile with the highest variation in body weight, the risk of a coronary event was 64% higher, the risk of a cardiovascular event 85% higher, death 124% higher, myocardial infarction 117% higher, and stroke 136% higher than it was among those in the quintile with the lowest variation in body weight in adjusted models. CONCLUSIONS: Among participants with coronary artery disease, fluctuation in body weight was associated with higher mortality and a higher rate of cardiovascular events independent of traditional cardiovascular risk factors. (Funded by Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00327691 .).

Strengthening the interpretability of clinical trial results by assessing the effect of informative censoring on the primary estimand in PRECISION.

BACKGROUND: The ICH E9(R1) addendum states that the strategy to account for intercurrent events should be included when defining an estimand, the treatment effect to be estimated based on the study objective. The estimator used to assess the treatment effect needs to be aligned with the estimand that accounted for intercurrent events. Regardless of the strategy, missing data resulting from patient premature withdrawal could undermine the robustness of the study results. Informative censoring due to dropouts in an events-based study is one such example. Sensitivity analyses using imputation methods are useful to examine the uncertainty due to informative censoring and address the robustness and strength of the study results. METHODS: We assessed the effect of premature patient withdrawal in the PRECISION study, a randomized non-inferiority clinical trial of patients with chronic arthritic pain that compared the cardiovascular safety of three nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs-based treatment policies or paradigms. The protocol-defined use of concomitant or rescue medications was permitted since changes in pain medications due to insufficient analgesia were expected in patients in this long-term study. Anticipating that premature study discontinuations could potentially lead to informative censoring, a supplementary analysis was pre-specified in which censored outcomes due to the premature study discontinuation were imputed based on adverse events that were clinically associated with the primary endpoint (cardiovascular outcome based on the Antiplatelet Trialists Collaboration composite endpoint). Furthermore, tipping point analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the primary analysis results by assuming data censored not at random. The level of increase at which the primary study conclusion would change was estimated. RESULTS: For the analysis of time to first primary endpoint event through 30 months, 4065 out of the 24,081 enrolled patients were lost to follow-up, withdrew consent, or were no longer willing to participate in the study. These withdrawals occurred gradually and resulted in a cumulative total of 5893 censored patient-years of observation (10.2%). The rate of discontinuation and the baseline characteristics of the discontinued patients were similar across the three treatment groups. The non-inferiority conclusion from the primary analysis was confirmed in the supplementary analysis incorporating relevant adverse events. Furthermore, tipping point analyses demonstrated that in order to lose non-inferiority in the primary analysis, the risk of primary endpoint events during the censored observation time would have to increase by more than 2.7-fold in the celecoxib group while remaining constant in the other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs groups, demonstrating that the scenarios where the study results are invalid appear not plausible. CONCLUSIONS: Supplementary and sensitivity analyses presented to address informative censoring in PRECISION helped to further interpret and strengthen the study results.

Triglyceride-Rich Lipoprotein Cholesterol and Risk of Cardiovascular Events Among Patients Receiving Statin Therapy in the TNT Trial.

BACKGROUND: Mendelian randomization data suggest that the genetic determinants of lifetime higher triglyceride-rich lipoprotein-cholesterol (TRL-C) are causally related to cardiovascular disease and therefore a potential therapeutic target. The relevance of TRL-C among patients receiving statins is unknown. We assessed the relationship between TRL-C and cardiovascular risk, and whether this risk was modifiable among patients receiving statins in the TNT trial (Treating to New Targets). METHODS: Patients with coronary heart disease and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) 130 to 250 mg/dL entered an 8-week run-in phase with atorvastatin 10 mg/d (ATV10). After this period, participants with LDL-C <130 mg/dL entered the randomized phase with ATV10 (n=5006) versus atorvastatin 80 mg/d (ATV80, n=4995). The primary end point was coronary heart disease death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or stroke (major adverse cardiovascular events [MACE]). TRL-C was calculated as total cholesterol minus high-density lipoprotein cholesterol minus LDL-C. The effect of atorvastatin on TRL-C was assessed during the run-in phase (ATV10) and randomized phase (ATV80 versus ATV10). The risk of MACE was assessed across quintiles (Q) of baseline TRL-C (and, for comparison, by baseline triglycerides and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol) during the randomized period. Last, the association between TRL-C changes with atorvastatin and cardiovascular risk was assessed by multivariate Cox regression. RESULTS: ATV10 reduced TRL-C 10.7% from an initial TRL-C of 33.9±16.6 mg/dL. ATV80 led to an additional 15.4% reduction. Cardiovascular risk factors positively correlated with TRL-C. Among patients receiving ATV10, higher TRL-C was associated with higher 5-year MACE rates (Q1=9.7%, Q5=13.8%; hazard ratio Q5-versus-Q1, 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-1.92; P-trend<0.0001). ATV80 (versus ATV10) did not significantly alter the risk of MACE in Q1-Q2, but significantly reduced risk in Q3-Q5 (relative risk reduction, 29%-41%; all P<0.0250), with evidence of effect modification ( P-homogeneity=0.0053); results were consistent for triglycerides ( P-homogeneity=0.0101) and directionally similar for non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ( P-homogeneity=0.1387). Last, in adjusted analyses, a 1 SD percentage reduction in TRL-C with atorvastatin resulted in a significant lower risk of MACE (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-1.00; P=0.0482) independent of the reduction in LDL-C and of similar magnitude to that per 1 SD lowering in LDL-C (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-0.95; P=0.0008). CONCLUSIONS: The present post hoc analysis from TNT shows that increased TRL-C levels are associated with an increased cardiovascular risk and provides evidence for the cardiovascular benefit of lipid lowering with statins among patients who have coronary heart disease with high TRL-C. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00327691.

Differential blood pressure effects of ibuprofen, naproxen, and celecoxib in patients with arthritis: the PRECISION-ABPM (Prospective Randomized Evaluation of Celecoxib Integrated Safety Versus Ibuprofen or Naproxen Ambulatory Blood Pressure Measurement) Trial.

AIMS: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), both non-selective and selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors, are among the most widely prescribed drugs worldwide, but associate with increased blood pressure (BP) and adverse cardiovascular (CV) events. PRECISION-ABPM, a substudy of PRECISION was conducted at 60 sites, to determine BP effects of the selective COX-2 inhibitor celecoxib vs. the non-selective NSAIDs naproxen and ibuprofen. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this double-blind, randomized, multicentre non-inferiority CV-safety trial, 444 patients (mean age 62 ± 10 years, 54% female) with osteoarthritis (92%) or rheumatoid arthritis (8%) and evidence of or at increased risk for coronary artery disease received celecoxib (100-200 mg bid), ibuprofen (600-800 mg tid), or naproxen (375-500 mg bid) with matching placebos in a 1: 1: 1 allocation, to assess the effect on 24-h ambulatory BP after 4 months. The change in mean 24-h systolic BP (SBP) in celecoxib, ibuprofen and naproxen-treated patients was -0.3 mmHg [95% confidence interval (CI), -2.25, 1.74], 3.7 (95% CI, 1.72, 5.58) and 1.6 mmHg (95% CI, -0.40, 3.57), respectively. These changes resulted in a difference of - 3.9 mmHg (P = 0.0009) between celecoxib and ibuprofen, of - 1.8 mmHg (P = 0.12) between celecoxib and naproxen, and of - 2.1 mmHg (P = 0.08) between naproxen and ibuprofen. The percentage of patients with normal baseline BP who developed hypertension (mean 24-h SBP ≥ 130 and/or diastolic BP ≥ 80 mmHg) was 23.2% for ibuprofen, 19.0% for naproxen, and 10.3% for celecoxib (odds ratio 0.39, P = 0.004 and odds ratio 0.49, P = 0.03 vs. ibuprofen and naproxen, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In PRECISION-ABPM, allocation to the non-selective NSAID ibuprofen, compared with the COX-2 selective inhibitor celecoxib was associated with a significant increase of SBP, and a higher incidence of new-onset hypertension. CLINICALTRIALS: gov number NCT00346216.

Lipid lowering in patients with treatment-resistant hypertension: an analysis from the Treating to New Targets (TNT) trial.

AIM: Patients with resistant hypertension are at high risk for adverse cardiovascular events. Efforts have been focused on lowering the surrogate endpoint of blood pressure (BP) with scant focus on reduction of hard cardiovascular endpoints. However, whether or not intensive lipid lowering is beneficial for reducing the risk of cardiovascular events in this high-risk cohort is not known. METHODS AND RESULTS: We evaluated 10 001 patients with coronary artery disease and a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level <130 mg/dL, randomized to atorvastatin 80 vs. 10 mg, enrolled in the Treating to New Targets trial. Treatment-resistant hypertension (TRH) was defined as BP ≥140 mmHg despite being on three antihypertensive agents or <140 mmHg on four or more agents. Subjects were followed up for a median duration of 4.9 years. The primary outcome was major cardiovascular events (composite of non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), fatal coronary heart disease (CHD), resuscitated cardiac arrest, and stroke). Among the 10 001 patients in the trial, 1112 (11.1%) patients had TRH. Atorvastatin 80 mg, in patients with TRH, was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of the primary outcome (HR = 0.70; 95% CI 0.52-0.93; P = 0.01), driven largely by a significant reduction in CHD deaths (HR = 0.55; 95% CI 0.32-0.97; P = 0.04). In addition, atorvastatin 80 mg was associated with a reduction in major coronary events (HR = 0.67; 95% CI 0.49-0.93; P = 0.02), and any cardiovascular or coronary event and with a trend (P = 0.05) towards reduction in all-cause mortality (HR = 0.68; 95% CI 0.46-1.01) when compared with atorvastatin 10 mg. The results were similar when analysed for the two separate components of the TRH cohort. CONCLUSION: In subjects with TRH, intensive lipid lowering with atorvastatin 80 mg is associated with a significant reduction in cardiovascular events.

Early improvement in depressive symptoms with desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d as a predictor of treatment success in patients with major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: This post hoc analysis assessed the predictive value of improvement in depressive scores at early time points for treatment outcomes at week 8 in patients with major depressive disorder treated with desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d or placebo. METHODS: Pooled data from 6 double-blind, fixed-dose studies in adult patients with major depressive disorder. Patients were randomly assigned to desvenlafaxine or placebo. Primary end point was change in 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D17) scores from baseline to week 8 (or last observation carried forward). Optimal thresholds of improvement (percent change from baseline HAM-D17) at weeks 2 and 3 for predicting 4 levels of treatment success (≥ 45%, ≥ 50%, and ≥ 65% decrease from baseline HAM-D17, HAM-D17 ≤ 7) at week 8 (last observation carried forward) were determined using receiver operating characteristic analysis. Odds ratios of the predictability of improvement thresholds were computed from a logistic regression model adjusting for significant baseline predictors. RESULTS: Desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d (n = 1207) had significantly greater rates of treatment success for each level of treatment success at 8 weeks compared with placebo (n = 1067). Optimal early improvement thresholds for weeks 2 (20%-30%) and 3 (28%-41%) were highly predictive of all 4 levels of treatment success after adjusting for significant baseline predictors (odds ratios, 0.951-0.960; all P < 0.0001). Negative predictive value of early improvement increased, and positive predictive value decreased, for increasingly stringent definitions of treatment success at week 8. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical observations of patients' early response to desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d may have clinical value in predicting treatment success and guiding patient management.

Predictors of functional response and remission with desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d in patients with major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: The predictive value of early functional improvement for treatment success at week 8 was assessed in a pooled analysis in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Data were pooled from 7 double-blind studies in adult patients with MDD randomly assigned to desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d or placebo. Four levels of treatment success were determined at week 8 for patients with baseline Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) score > 12 (N = 2156): functional response (SDS ≤12 and ≥50% improvement in SDS), functional/depression response (SDS ≤12 and ≥50% improvement in both SDS and 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression [HAM-D17] score), functional remission (SDS < 7), and functional/depression remission (SDS < 7 and HAM-D17 ≤7). Week 2 improvement in SDS was evaluated as a predictor of later functional response/remission using receiver operating characteristic analysis. Odds ratios (ORs) of the predictability of improvement thresholds were computed from a logistic regression model. RESULTS: The proportion of patients achieving each level of treatment success was significantly greater for patients treated with desvenlafaxine (40%, 32%, 23%, 15%, respectively) vs placebo (31%, 22%, 17%, 10%; all P ≤ 0.002). Early change in SDS was a highly significant predictor of functional response/remission (ORs, 0.958-0.970; all P < 0.0001). Discussion Patients' early functional response to desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d is predictive of treatment success.

The effect of desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day on a subpopulation of anxious/depressed patients: a pooled analysis of seven randomized, placebo-controlled studies.

BACKGROUND: Desvenlafaxine (administered as desvenlafaxine succinate) for anxious depression was assessed in a post hoc analysis. METHODS: Data were pooled from patients randomly assigned to desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day or placebo in seven double-blind, fixed-dose studies in adults with major depressive disorder. Patients with "anxious depression" had baseline 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, anxiety-somatization factor (HAM-D17 A/S) scores ≥7. Primary end point was change in HAM-D17 scores from baseline at week 8 (last observation carried forward), evaluated using analysis of covariance with treatment, study, and baseline value as covariates. RESULTS: A total of 1873/2706 (69%) patients were identified as "anxious depressed". Desvenlafaxine significantly improved HAM-D17 total scores versus placebo in anxious (adjusted mean [95% CI] -1.72 [-2.35, -1.09]; p < 0.001) and nonanxious (-1.48 [-2.40, -0.57]; p = 0.002) populations, with no significant treatment-by-anxiety interaction. Response and remission rates (HAM-D17 ) were significantly higher with desvenlafaxine compared with placebo in both populations. Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported by 78% and 69% (desvenlafaxine versus placebo, respectively) of anxious depressed patients and by 77% and 68% of nonanxious patients. CONCLUSION: Desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day significantly improved depressive symptoms compared with placebo in major depressive disorder patients with clinically relevant anxiety symptoms. Improvement in the HAM-D17 total score was similar for anxious/nonanxious groups.

An evaluation of sexual functioning in employed outpatients with major depressive disorder treated with desvenlafaxine 50 mg or placebo.

INTRODUCTION: The symptoms of major depressive disorder (MDD) include sexual dysfunction, but antidepressant pharmacotherapies are also associated with treatment-emergent sexual dysfunction. AIM: These secondary and post hoc analyses evaluated sexual functioning in employed adult outpatients with MDD treated with desvenlafaxine (administered as desvenlafaxine succinate) and placebo. METHOD: Patients were randomly assigned (2:1 ratio) to 12 weeks of double-blind treatment with desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day or placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The Arizona Sexual Experiences Scale (ASEX) was administered every 4 weeks. Analysis of covariance was used to compare differences in mean change from baseline ASEX scores between desvenlafaxine and placebo for women and men. RESULTS: There were 422 evaluable patients with baseline ASEX scores (desvenlafaxine, N = 281; placebo, N = 141). Among women (desvenlafaxine, N = 184; placebo, N = 92), baseline scores were 20.0 (5.2) and 20.5 (5.3) for desvenlafaxine and placebo, respectively; mean changes at week 12 were -1.93 (0.37) and -1.03 (0.54), respectively (mean difference: 0.90 [-0.38, 2.18]; P = 0.169). Among men (desvenlafaxine, N = 97; placebo, N = 49), baseline scores were 16.4 (4.9) and 15.9 (4.8) for desvenlafaxine and placebo, respectively; mean changes at week 12 were -1.13 (0.47) and -1.06 (0.70), respectively (mean difference: 0.07 [-1.59, 1.74]; P = 0.932). Significantly greater orgasmic dysfunction at week 12 was observed in the subgroup of men without baseline sexual dysfunction treated with desvenlafaxine relative to placebo. Conversely, women without baseline sexual dysfunction experienced poorer overall sexual functioning and orgasm satisfaction at week 12 with placebo relative to desvenlafaxine treatment. Subgroup analyses of treatment responders and nonresponders found no difference in the proportion of men or women that developed or had resolution of sexual dysfunction in the desvenlafaxine and placebo groups. CONCLUSION: With the exception of orgasmic dysfunction in men without preexisting sexual dysfunction, no significant negative effect on sexual functioning was observed over 12 weeks of treatment with desvenlafaxine.

Effect of intensive lipid-lowering therapy on cardiovascular outcome in patients with and those without inflammatory joint disease.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of intensive lipid-lowering therapy on a composite cardiovascular outcome (cardiovascular disease [CVD]), consisting of mortality and morbidity end points, in patients with inflammatory joint disease (rheumatoid arthritis [RA], ankylosing spondylitis [AS], or psoriatic arthritis [PsA]) by post hoc analysis of 2 prospective trials of statins with a secondary end point of CVD outcome (the Treating to New Targets [TNT] and Incremental Decrease in End Points Through Aggressive Lipid Lowering [IDEAL] studies). METHODS: Of the 18,889 patients participating in the 2 trials, 199 had RA, 46 had AS, and 35 had PsA. Lipid-lowering therapy consisted of an intensive regimen of atorvastatin 80 mg or a conventional/low-dose regimen of atorvastatin 10 mg or simvastatin 20-40 mg. The median duration of followup was nearly 5 years. Changes in lipid levels were examined by analyses of covariance. The effect on CVD was examined by Cox regression analyses, and heterogeneity tests were performed. RESULTS: Patients with RA and those with AS had lower baseline cholesterol levels than patients without inflammatory joint disease (least squares mean ± SEM 180.7 ± 2.3 mg/dl and 176.5 ± 4.7 mg/dl, respectively, versus 185.6 ± 0.2 mg/dl; P = 0.03 and P = 0.05, respectively). Statin treatment led to a comparable decrease in lipid levels and a 20% reduction in overall risk of CVD in both patients with and those without inflammatory joint disease. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that patients with and those without inflammatory joint disease experience comparable lipid-lowering effects and CVD risk reduction after intensive treatment with statins.

A plain language summary on ritlecitinib treatment for adults and adolescents with alopecia areata.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of the results of the ALLEGRO phase 2b/3 clinical trial, originally published in The Lancet. ALLEGRO-2b/3 looked at how well and safely the study medicine, ritlecitinib, works in treating people with alopecia areata ('AA' for short). The immune system protects your body from outside invaders such as bacteria and viruses. AA is an autoimmune disease, meaning a disease in which one's immune system attacks healthy cells of the body by mistake. In AA, the immune system attacks hair follicles, causing hair to fall out. AA causes hair loss ranging from small bald patches to complete hair loss on the scalp, face, and/or body. Ritlecitinib is a medicine taken as a pill every day, by mouth, that is approved for the treatment of severe AA. It blocks processes that are known to play a role in causing hair loss in patients with AA. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY?: Adults and adolescents (12 years and older) took part in the ALLEGRO-2b/3 study. They either took ritlecitinib for 48 weeks or took a placebo (a pill with no medicine) for 24 weeks. Participants taking placebo later switched to taking ritlecitinib for 24 weeks. The study showed that participants taking ritlecitinib had more hair regrowth on their scalp after 24 weeks than those taking the placebo. Hair regrowth was also seen on the eyebrows and eyelashes in participants taking ritlecitinib. Hair regrowth continued to improve to week 48 with continued ritlecitinib treatment. In addition, more participants taking ritlecitinib reported that their AA had 'moderately' or 'greatly' improved after 24 weeks than those taking the placebo. Similar numbers of participants taking ritlecitinib or placebo had side effects after 24 weeks. Most side effects were mild or moderate. WHAT DO THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY MEAN?: Ritlecitinib was an effective and well-tolerated treatment over 48 weeks for people with AA. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03732807 (phase 2b/3 ALLEGRO study).

Plain language summary: use of isavuconazole in Chinese patients with an invasive fungal disease.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: Invasive aspergillosis (also known as IA) is a type of fungal infection, caused by a species of fungus called Aspergillus, that can be life threatening. Isavuconazole and voriconazole belong to a group of antifungal drugs called triazoles that are recommended for treating IA. In the USA and in Europe, isavuconazole is approved for treating patients with IA. In China, isavuconazole was recently being reviewed for approval for treating patients with IA. This study looked at whether isavuconazole works in the same way in healthy Chinese people as it does in healthy Western people. It also looked to see how well isavuconazole works and how many side effects it has compared with voriconazole in Chinese patients with IA. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: The results of this study showed that healthy Chinese people's bodies processed isavuconazole the same way as healthy Western people's bodies. The amount of drug in people's bodies did not change how well the drug worked or how many side effects there were. Isavuconazole worked as well as and had a similar number of side effects as voriconazole in treating Chinese patients with IA. WHAT DO THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY MEAN?: These findings show that isavuconazole may be a suitable treatment for Chinese patients with IA using the same dose that is used in Western patients.

On-treatment lipoprotein components and risk of cerebrovascular events in the Treating to New Targets study.

BACKGROUND: The Treating to New Targets (TNT) study has recently provided evidence that reduction in LDL-C levels below 2·6 mmol L⁻¹ lowers the risk of cerebrovascular events by an additional 20% to 25%, thereby confirming the value of statin therapy in preventing transient ischaemic attacks and stroke. Despite the protective effects of statin therapy, the epidemiological association between lipid components and cerebrovascular events is less clear. We therefore assessed the strength of association between in-trial lipoprotein components and cerebrovascular disease in patients receiving intensive lipid-lowering therapy. METHODS: In 9247 patients (mean age 61·0 years, 81·2% males), the association between lipoprotein components and the risk of cerebrovascular events after the first year into the TNT trial was assessed after stratification of lipoprotein components into approximate quartiles. Cox proportional hazards models were used to explore the association between lipoprotein components and time to first cerebrovascular event after adjustment for potential confounding variables. RESULTS: All lipoprotein components, except LDL-C, showed a significant gradient for incidence of cerebrovascular events with increasing quartiles of the lipoprotein component. If the lipoprotein components were treated as continuous variables, the adjusted hazard ratios (95% CI) for cerebrovascular events for 1 SD difference in 1-year lipoprotein components were 1·13 (1·02-1·25) for LDL-C, 0·86 (0·76-0·97) for HDL-C, 1·17 (1·04-1·28) for apoB, 0·83 (0·74-0·94) for apoA-1, 1·22 (1·10-1·34) for TC/HDL-C and 1·24 (1·12-1·37) for apoB/apoA-1. CONCLUSIONS: In coronary heart disease patients receiving intensive lipid-lowering treatment, the on-treatment apoB/apoA-1 ratio provides the strongest association with incidence of cerebrovascular events followed by TC/HDL-C.

LDL cholesterol goals and cardiovascular risk during statin treatment: the IDEAL study.

AIMS: We assessed the proportion of patients treated with either simvastatin 20 or 40 mg or atorvastatin 80 mg who achieved low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals of 2.5 or 2.0 mmol/l in the Incremental Decrease in End Points Through Aggressive Lipid Lowering (IDEAL) study. We explored how lipoprotein components related to cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes in these groups. METHODS AND RESULTS: For subjects who reached on-treatment LDL-C goals, Cox regression models were used to assess the ability of lipoprotein components to predict CVD events. Treatment with simvastatin or atorvastatin resulted in 40 per cent and 80 per cent of patients, respectively, reaching the 2.5 mmol/l goal and 12 per cent and 52 per cent, respectively, reaching the 2.0 mmol/l goal, after 1 year (all p < 0.001 between groups). Adjusting for baseline LDL-C levels, hazard ratio (HR) for those reaching 2.0-2.5 mmol/l LDL-C versus those reaching <2.0 mmol/l was 1.16 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.33, p = 0.023). An increase of the apolipoprotein B/A1 (apoB/A1) ratio by 1 standard deviation in participants who reached 2.0 mmol/l showed a HR for CVD of 1.14 (95% CI, 1.04-1.25, p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: More CVD patients treated with atorvastatin than simvastatin achieved either LDL-C goal and those reaching the 2.0 mmol/l goal exhibited significantly less CVD than those only reaching 2.5 mmol/l. In those reaching the 2.0 mmol/l goal, the apoB/A1 ratio still bears a relation to CVD outcome. The use of apoB/A1 ratio may provide additional predictive value to that of LDL-C.

TRS2P and LDL-C alone or in combination for predicting absolute benefits from additional LDL-C lowering: Analysis from the TNT trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Despite trial evidence, high intensity statins are underutilized in routine clinical practice. This study sought to assess the individual and joint contributions of the TRS2P score as a measure of residual risk and LDL-C levels to benefits from further LDL-C lowering in the TNT trial. METHODS: A total of 9980 patients were divided into 4 groups based on TRS2P and LDL-C at baseline: median (7.2%, group 4), NNT 78 vs. 14 (p-interaction <0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Measures of residual risk as well LDL-C identify patients who remain at high risk despite statins with the combination identifying those who derive the greatest benefits from even modest additional LDL-C lowering. Attention to residual risk as well as LDL-C may further help to optimize guideline implementation.

Atorvastatin Reduces First and Subsequent Vascular Events Across Vascular Territories: The SPARCL Trial.

BACKGROUND: In the SPARCL (Stroke Prevention by Aggressive Reduction in Cholesterol Levels) trial, atorvastatin was compared with placebo in 4,731 participants with recent stroke or transient ischemic attack and no known coronary heart disease. Atorvastatin reduced the first occurrence of stroke and the first occurrence of a composite of vascular events. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this post hoc analysis was to assess the occurrence of all (first and subsequent) vascular events and the effect of atorvastatin to reduce these events by vascular territory (cerebrovascular, coronary, or peripheral) in SPARCL. METHODS: Treatment effects on total adjudicated vascular events, overall and by vascular territory, were summarized by marginal proportional hazards models. Vascular event rates were estimated for each treatment group with cumulative incidence functions. RESULTS: The placebo group had an estimated 41.2 first and 62.7 total vascular events per 100 participants over 6 years. There were 164 fewer first and 390 fewer total vascular events in the atorvastatin group (total events hazard ratio: 0.68; 95% confidence interval: 0.60 to 0.77). The total events reduction included 177 fewer cerebrovascular, 170 fewer coronary, and 43 fewer peripheral events. Over 6 years, an estimated 20 vascular events per 100 participants were avoided with atorvastatin treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In participants with recent stroke or transient ischemic attack, the total number of vascular events prevented with atorvastatin was more than twice the number of first events prevented. Total event reduction provides a comprehensive metric to capture the totality of atorvastatin clinical efficacy in reducing disease burden after stroke or transient ischemic attack. (Lipitor in the Prevention of Stroke, for Patients Who Have Had a Previous Stroke [SPARCL]; NCT00147602).

Focused atorvastatin therapy in managed-care patients with coronary heart disease and CKD.

BACKGROUND: This post hoc analysis of the Aggressive Lipid-Lowering Initiation Abates New Cardiac Events (ALLIANCE) Study investigates the effect of focused atorvastatin therapy versus usual care on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) with and without chronic kidney disease (CKD). STUDY DESIGN: Prospective randomized open-label; median follow-up, 54.3 months. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Managed care or Veterans Affairs facilities; 2,442 patients with CHD with dyslipidemia; mean age, 61.6 years. INTERVENTION: Focused atorvastatin therapy to a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goal of less than 80 mg/dL or maximum dose of 80 mg/d versus usual care as deemed appropriate by patients' regular physicians. PREDICTOR: Baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) calculated using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study equation of less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (patients with CKD) and 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) or greater (patients without CKD). OUTCOMES & MEASUREMENTS: The primary end point was time to first cardiovascular event. Change from baseline eGFR was assessed in 1,768 patients with follow-up renal data. RESULTS: At baseline, 579 patients (23.7%) had CKD: 31.6% of these patients experienced a primary cardiovascular event during the study versus 23.6% of patients without CKD (hazard ratio [HR], 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18 to 1.68; P < 0.001). Compared with usual care, atorvastatin therapy reduced the relative risk of a primary outcome by 28% in patients with CKD (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.97; P = 0.02) and 11% in patients without CKD (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.07; P = 0.3) (P for treatment by CKD interaction = 0.2). There was no decrease in eGFR in atorvastatin-treated patients during the course of the study. LIMITATIONS: Follow-up of atorvastatin patients was restricted to every 6 months; interim data were unavailable for usual-care patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CHD and CKD are at increased risk of cardiovascular events. Compared with usual care, focused atorvastatin treatment decreased cardiovascular risk for established patients in real-world settings, with no significant difference in treatment effects observed between patients with and without CKD.

Phase I trial of sunitinib malate plus interferon-alpha for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Sunitinib malate is an oral, multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor that has demonstrated superior efficacy over interferon (IFN)-alpha in a phase III trial in first-line, metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Herein, we report the results of a phase I dose-finding study of sunitinib in combination with IFN-alpha as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic RCC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Treatment-naive patients with clear-cell metastatic RCC received sunitinib at a starting dose of 50 mg or 37.5 mg orally once daily in 6-week cycles (schedule 4/2) plus IFN-alpha at a starting dose of 3 MU subcutaneously 3 times a week, with weekly intrapatient dose escalation to a maximum of 9 MU as tolerated. Patients who did not tolerate either drug received lower doses of either or had dose interruptions. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled; their median age was 64 years (range, 45-77 years). All patients experienced grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events; the most common were neutropenia, fatigue, and thrombocytopenia. After a median of 4 cycles (range, 1-9 cycles), 3 patients (12%) had a partial response, and 20 (80%) had stable disease. CONCLUSION: Although reduced starting doses were tolerated (37.5 mg for sunitinib and 3 MU for IFN-alpha), even these lower doses might not be well tolerated for long-term treatment of patients with metastatic RCC. Based on historical data, sunitinib on schedule 4/2 appears to be more effective as single-agent therapy. Further study of sunitinib plus IFN-alpha on this schedule is not being pursued in RCC.