Trilaciclib prior to chemotherapy and atezolizumab in patients with newly diagnosed extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: A multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase II trial.

Trilaciclib is an intravenous CDK4/6 inhibitor administered prior to chemotherapy to preserve haematopoietic stem and progenitor cells and immune system function from chemotherapy-induced damage (myelopreservation). The effects of administering trilaciclib prior to carboplatin, etoposide and atezolizumab (E/P/A) were evaluated in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase II study in patients with newly diagnosed extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) (NCT03041311). The primary endpoints were duration of severe neutropenia (SN; defined as absolute neutrophil count <0.5 × 109 cells per L) in Cycle 1 and occurrence of SN during the treatment period. Other endpoints were prespecified to assess the effects of trilaciclib on additional measures of myelopreservation, patient-reported outcomes, antitumour efficacy and safety. Fifty-two patients received trilaciclib prior to E/P/A and 53 patients received placebo. Compared to placebo, administration of trilaciclib resulted in statistically significant decreases in the mean duration of SN in Cycle 1 (0 vs 4 days; P < .0001) and occurrence of SN (1.9% vs 49.1%; P < .0001), with additional improvements in red blood cell and platelet measures and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Trilaciclib was well tolerated, with fewer grade ≥3 adverse events compared with placebo, primarily due to less high-grade haematological toxicity. Antitumour efficacy outcomes were comparable. Administration of trilaciclib vs placebo generated more newly expanded peripheral T-cell clones (P = .019), with significantly greater expansion among patients with an antitumour response to E/P/A (P = .002). Compared with placebo, trilaciclib administered prior to E/P/A improved patients' experience of receiving treatment for ES-SCLC, as shown by reduced myelosuppression, and improved HRQoL and safety profiles.

ASIED: a Bayesian adaptive subgroup-identification enrichment design.

Developing targeted therapies based on patients' baseline characteristics and genomic profiles such as biomarkers has gained growing interests in recent years. Depending on patients' clinical characteristics, the expression of specific biomarkers or their combinations, different patient subgroups could respond differently to the same treatment. An ideal design, especially at the proof of concept stage, should search for such subgroups and make dynamic adaptation as the trial goes on. When no prior knowledge is available on whether the treatment works on the all-comer population or only works on the subgroup defined by one biomarker or several biomarkers, it is necessary to incorporate the adaptive estimation of the heterogeneous treatment effect to the decision-making at interim analyses. To address this problem, we propose an Adaptive Subgroup-Identification Enrichment Design, ASIED, to simultaneously search for predictive biomarkers, identify the subgroups with differential treatment effects, and modify study entry criteria at interim analyses when justified. More importantly, we construct robust quantitative decision-making rules for population enrichment when the interim outcomes are heterogeneous in the context of a multilevel target product profile, which defines the minimal and targeted levels of treatment effect. Through extensive simulations, the ASIED is demonstrated to achieve desirable operating characteristics and compare favorably against alternatives.

Adaptive, dose-finding phase 2 trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of ABT-089 in mild to moderate Alzheimer disease.

ABT-089, an α4ß2 neuronal nicotinic receptor partial agonist, was evaluated for efficacy and safety in mild to moderate Alzheimer disease patients receiving stable doses of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors. This phase 2 double-blind, placebo-controlled, proof-of-concept, and dose-finding study adaptively randomized patients to receive ABT-089 (5, 10, 15, 20, 30, or 35 mg once daily) or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale, cognition subscale (ADAS-Cog) total score. A Bayesian response-adaptive randomization algorithm dynamically assigned allocation probabilities based on interim ADAS-Cog total scores. A normal dynamic linear model for dose-response relationships and a longitudinal model for predicting final ADAS-cog score were employed in the algorithm. Stopping criteria for futility or success were defined. The futility stopping criterion was met, terminating the study with 337 patients randomized. No dose-response relationship was observed and no dose demonstrated statistically significant improvement over placebo on ADAS-Cog or any secondary endpoint. ABT-089 was well tolerated at all dose levels. When administered as adjunctive therapy to acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, ABT-089 was not efficacious in mild to moderate Alzheimer disease. The adaptive study design enabled the examination of a broad dose range, enabled rapid determination of futility, and reduced patient exposure to nonefficacious doses of the investigational compound.

The endothelin antagonist atrasentan lowers residual albuminuria in patients with type 2 diabetic nephropathy.

Despite optimal treatment, including renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors, patients with type 2 diabetic nephropathy have high cardiorenal morbidity and mortality related to residual albuminuria. We evaluated whether or not atrasentan, a selective endothelin A receptor antagonist, further reduces albuminuria when administered concomitantly with maximum tolerated labeled doses of RAS inhibitors. We enrolled 211 patients with type 2 diabetes, urine albumin/creatinine ratios of 300-3500 mg/g, and eGFRs of 30-75 ml/min per 1.73 m(2) in two identically designed, parallel, multinational, double-blind studies. Participants were randomized to placebo (n=50) or to 0.75 mg/d (n=78) or 1.25 mg/d (n=83) atrasentan for 12 weeks. Compared with placebo, 0.75 mg and 1.25 mg atrasentan reduced urine albumin/creatinine ratios by an average of 35% and 38% (95% confidence intervals of 24 to 45 and 28 to 47, respectively) and reduced albuminuria≥30% in 51% and 55% of participants, respectively. eGFR and office BP measurements did not change, whereas 24-hour systolic and diastolic BP, LDL cholesterol, and triglyceride levels decreased significantly in both treatment groups. Use of atrasentan was associated with a significant increase in weight and a reduction in hemoglobin, but rates of peripheral edema, heart failure, or other side effects did not differ between groups. However, more patients treated with 1.25 mg/d atrasentan discontinued due to adverse events. After stopping atrasentan for 30 days, measured parameters returned to pretreatment levels. In conclusion, atrasentan reduced albuminuria and improved BP and lipid spectrum with manageable fluid overload-related adverse events in patients with type 2 diabetic nephropathy receiving RAS inhibitors.

Vitamin D reduces left atrial volume in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy and chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: Left atrial enlargement, a sensitive integrator of left ventricular diastolic function, is associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Vitamin D is linked to lower cardiovascular morbidity, possibly modifying cardiac structure and function; however, firm evidence is lacking. We assessed the effect of an activated vitamin D analog on left atrial volume index (LAVi) in a post hoc analysis of the PRIMO trial (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00497146). METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred ninety-six patients with chronic kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate 15-60 mL/min per 1.73 m(2)), mild to moderate left ventricular hypertrophy, and preserved ejection fraction were randomly assigned to 2 µg of oral paricalcitol or matching placebo for 48 weeks. Two-dimensional echocardiography was obtained at baseline and at 24 and 48 weeks after initiation of therapy. Over the study period, there was a significant decrease in LAVi (-2.79 mL/m(2), 95% CI -4.00 to -1.59 mL/m(2)) in the paricalcitol group compared with the placebo group (-0.70 mL/m(2) [95% CI -1.93 to 0.53 mL/m(2)], P = .002). Paricalcitol also attenuated the rise in levels of brain natriuretic peptide (10.8% in paricalcitol vs 21.3% in placebo, P = .02). For the entire population, the change in brain natriuretic peptide correlated with change in LAVi (r = 0.17, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Forty-eight weeks of therapy with an active vitamin D analog reduces LAVi and attenuates the rise of BNP. In a population where only few therapies alter cardiovascular related morbidity and mortality, these post hoc results warrant further confirmation.

Addition of atrasentan to renin-angiotensin system blockade reduces albuminuria in diabetic nephropathy.

Although endothelin-receptor antagonists reduce albuminuria in diabetic nephropathy, fluid retention limits their use. Here, we examined the effect of atrasentan, a selective endothelin A receptor (ET(A)R) antagonist, on albuminuria in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of subjects with diabetic nephropathy already receiving stable doses of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors. We randomly assigned 89 subjects with eGFR >20 ml/min per 1.73 m(2) and a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) of 100 to 3000 mg/g to placebo or atrasentan (0.25, 0.75, or 1.75 mg daily) for 8 weeks. Compared with placebo, atrasentan significantly reduced UACR only in the 0.75- and 1.75-mg groups (P=0.001 and P=0.011, respectively). Compared with the 11% reduction in the geometric mean of the UACR from baseline to final observation in the placebo group during the study, the geometric mean of UACR decreased by 21, 42, and 35% in the 0.25-, 0.75-, and 1.75-mg atrasentan groups (P=0.291, P=0.023, and P=0.073, respectively). In the placebo group, 17% of subjects achieved ≥40% reduction in UACR from baseline compared with 30, 50, and 38% in the 0.25-, 0.75-, and 1.75-mg atrasentan groups, respectively (P=0.029 for 0.75 mg versus placebo). Peripheral edema occurred in 9% of subjects receiving placebo and in 14, 18, and 46% of those receiving 0.25, 0.5, and 1.75 mg atrasentan, respectively (P=0.007 for 1.75 mg versus placebo). In summary, atrasentan, at the doses tested, is generally safe and effective in reducing residual albuminuria and may ultimately improve renal outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetic nephropathy.

Vitamin D therapy and cardiac structure and function in patients with chronic kidney disease: the PRIMO randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Vitamin D is associated with decreased cardiovascular-related morbidity and mortality, possibly by modifying cardiac structure and function, yet firm evidence for either remains lacking. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of an active vitamin D compound, paricalcitol, on left ventricular mass over 48 weeks in patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 15 to 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Multinational, double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial among 227 patients with chronic kidney disease, mild to moderate left ventricular hypertrophy, and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction, conducted in 11 countries from July 2008 through September 2010. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomly assigned to receive oral paricalcitol, 2 µg/d (n =115), or matching placebo (n = 112). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Change in left ventricular mass index over 48 weeks by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging. Secondary end points included echocardiographic changes in left ventricular diastolic function. RESULTS: Treatment with paricalcitol reduced parathyroid hormone levels within 4 weeks and maintained levels within the normal range throughout the study duration. At 48 weeks, the change in left ventricular mass index did not differ between treatment groups (paricalcitol group, 0.34 g/m(2.7) [95% CI, -0.14 to 0.83 g/m(2.7)] vs placebo group, -0.07 g/m(2.7) [95% CI, -0.55 to 0.42 g/m(2.7)]). Doppler measures of diastolic function including peak early diastolic lateral mitral annular tissue velocity (paricalcitol group, -0.01 cm/s [95% CI, -0.63 to 0.60 cm/s] vs placebo group, -0.30 cm/s [95% CI, -0.93 to 0.34 cm/s]) also did not differ. Episodes of hypercalcemia were more frequent in the paricalcitol group compared with the placebo group. CONCLUSION: Forty-eight week therapy with paricalcitol did not alter left ventricular mass index or improve certain measures of diastolic dysfunction in patients with chronic kidney disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00497146.

Selective vitamin D receptor activation with paricalcitol for reduction of albuminuria in patients with type 2 diabetes (VITAL study): a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite treatment with renin­angiotensin­aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors, patients with diabetes have increased risk of progressive renal failure that correlates with albuminuria. We aimed to assess whether paricalcitol could be used to reduce albuminuria in patients with diabetic nephropathy. METHODS: In this multinational, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial, we enrolled patients with type 2 diabetes and albuminuria who were receiving angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers. Patients were assigned (1:1:1) by computer-generated randomisation sequence to receive 24 weeks' treatment with placebo,1 µg/day paricalcitol, or 2 µg/day paricalcitol. The primary endpoint was the percentage change in geometric mean urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) from baseline to last measurement during treatment for the combined paricalcitol groups versus the placebo group. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00421733. FINDINGS: Between February, 2007, and October, 2008, 281 patients were enrolled and assigned to receive placebo(n=93), 1 µg paricalcitol (n=93), or 2 µg paricalcitol (n=95); 88 patients on placebo, 92 on 1 µg paricalcitol, and 92 on2 µg paricalcitol received at least one dose of study drug, and had UACR data at baseline and at least one timepoint during treatment, and so were included in the primary analysis. Change in UACR was: ­3% (from 61 to 60 mg/mmol;95% CI ­16 to 13) in the placebo group; ­16% (from 62 to 51 mg/mmol; ­24 to ­9) in the combined paricalcitol groups, with a between-group difference versus placebo of ­15% (95% CI ­28 to 1; p=0.071); ­14% (from 63 to 54 mg/mmol; ­24 to ­1) in the 1 µg paricalcitol group, with a between-group difference versus placebo of ­11%(95% CI ­27 to 8; p=0.23); and ­20% (from 61 to 49 mg/mmol; ­30 to ­8) in the 2 µg paricalcitol group, with a between-group difference versus placebo of ­18% (95% CI ­32 to 0; p=0.053). Patients on 2 µg paricalcitol showed a nearly, sustained reduction in UACR, ranging from ­18% to ­28% (p=0.014 vs placebo). Incidence of hypercalcaemia,adverse events, and serious adverse events was similar between groups receiving paricalcitol versus placebo. INTERPRETATION: Addition of 2 µg/day paricalcitol to RAAS inhibition safely lowers residual albuminuria in patients with diabetic nephropathy, and could be a novel approach to lower residual renal risk in diabetes. FUNDING: Abbott.

Vitamin D receptor activation and left ventricular hypertrophy in advanced kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: In chronic kidney disease (CKD), left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) is prevalent and is associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Vitamin D receptor (VDR) activation attenuates LVH progression in animal models. METHODS: PRIMO is a multinational, randomized, double-blinded trial with oral paricalcitol in subjects with stages 3-4 CKD, mild-to-moderate LVH and an LV ejection fraction >50%. The primary endpoint is change in the left ventricular mass index (LVMI) compared with placebo after 48 weeks of treatment. The main secondary endpoints are changes in diastolic function parameters. In this paper, we report baseline characteristics from this study. RESULTS: LVMI was 33.0 ± 7.5 g/m(2.7) for males and 30.8 ± 7.2 g/m(2.7) for females (p = 0.04). LVMI correlated with systolic blood pressure (r = 0.24), urine albumin creatinine ratio (r = 0.39), troponin T (r = 0.29), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (r = 0.25) and plasma levels of B-type brain natriuretic peptide (r = 0.22); all p < 0.01. In multiple linear regression, each remained independently associated with LVMI. The early diastolic velocity of the lateral mitral annulus (E') was 8.1 ± 2.4 cm/s. E' was inversely correlated with age in univariate (r = -0.14, p = 0.04) and multivariable (p = 0.02) analysis. CONCLUSION: Among 227 multinational subjects with stages 3-4 CKD, baseline LVMI correlates with baseline blood pressure, urine albumin creatinine ratio and cardiac biomarkers, and baseline diastolic function correlates with age. This research was funded by Abbott Laboratories; ClinicalTrials.gov No. NCT00497146.

The use of group sequential, information-based sample size re-estimation in the design of the PRIMO study of chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease is associated with a marked increase in risk for left ventricular hypertrophy and cardiovascular mortality compared with the general population. Therapy with vitamin D receptor activators has been linked with reduced mortality in chronic kidney disease and an improvement in left ventricular hypertrophy in animal studies. PURPOSE: PRIMO (Paricalcitol capsules benefits in Renal failure Induced cardia MOrbidity) is a multinational, multicenter randomized controlled trial to assess the effects of paricalcitol (a selective vitamin D receptor activator) on mild to moderate left ventricular hypertrophy in patients with chronic kidney disease. METHODS: Subjects with mild-moderate chronic kidney disease are randomized to paricalcitol or placebo after confirming left ventricular hypertrophy using a cardiac echocardiogram. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging is then used to assess left ventricular mass index at baseline, 24 and 48 weeks, which is the primary efficacy endpoint of the study. Because of limited prior data to estimate sample size, a maximum information group sequential design with sample size re-estimation is implemented to allow sample size adjustment based on the nuisance parameter estimated using the interim data. An interim efficacy analysis is planned at a pre-specified time point conditioned on the status of enrollment. The decision to increase sample size depends on the observed treatment effect. A repeated measures analysis model, using available data at Week 24 and 48 with a backup model of an ANCOVA analyzing change from baseline to the final nonmissing observation, are pre-specified to evaluate the treatment effect. Gamma-family of spending function is employed to control family-wise Type I error rate as stopping for success is planned in the interim efficacy analysis. LIMITATIONS: If enrollment is slower than anticipated, the smaller sample size used in the interim efficacy analysis and the greater percent of missing week 48 data might decrease the parameter estimation accuracy, either for the nuisance parameter or for the treatment effect, which might in turn affect the interim decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: The application of combining a group sequential design with a sample-size re-estimation in clinical trial design has the potential to improve efficiency and to increase the probability of trial success while ensuring integrity of the study.

Suicidality and divalproex sodium: analysis of controlled studies in multiple indications.

BACKGROUND: Recent analyses of antiepileptic drugs have indicated an increase in the risk of suicidality. The objective of this report was to provide clinical information and an independent meta-analysis of divalproex sodium and suicidality events by analyzing data from 13 placebo-controlled studies and 1 low-dose controlled study. METHODS: Adverse events considered to be possibly suicide related were identified using the Columbia Classification Algorithm of Suicide Assessment (C-CASA) methodology. Indications included epilepsy, bipolar disorder, migraine prophylaxis, impulsive aggression, and dementia. Narratives were produced for every event, and suicidality event ratings were performed by a third party blinded to treatment assignment. Statistical analyses were conducted using methodology similar to that reported by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). RESULTS: Suicidality events were identified in 5 of the 13 placebo-controlled studies. Of the 1,327 (0.83%) subjects taking divalproex sodium, 11 had suicidality events: 2 suicide attempts and 9 suicidal ideation. Of 992 (0.91%) subjects taking placebo, 9 had suicidality events: 1 preparatory act toward suicide, 2 suicide attempts, and 6 suicidal ideation. Across placebo-controlled studies, the overall estimated odds ratio (OR) of suicidal behavior or ideation was 0.72 (95% CI 0.29 to 1.84). The OR for suicidal behavior was 0.37 (95% CI 0.04 to 2.58), and the OR for suicidal ideation was 0.90 (95% CI 0.31 to 2.79). CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis, divalproex sodium does not appear to increase the risk of suicide-related adverse events relative to placebo in the populations studied. Clinicians should nonetheless remain vigilant in assessing suicidality, not only in patients treated for mental disorders with inherently high suicide risk, but also in patients taking antiepileptic medications.

Myeloprotective Effects of Trilaciclib Among Patients with Small Cell Lung Cancer at Increased Risk of Chemotherapy-Induced Myelosuppression: Pooled Results from Three Phase 2, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Studies.

PURPOSE: Trilaciclib is an intravenous cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor indicated to decrease the incidence of chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression (CIM) by protecting hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells and immune system function from chemotherapy-induced damage (myeloprotection). Here, we investigated the myeloprotective effects of trilaciclib among patients at increased risk of CIM. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were pooled from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 clinical studies of trilaciclib administered prior to chemotherapy in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). Myeloprotective outcomes were evaluated in patient subgroups based on age (<65 or ≥65 years), risk of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN), and risk of anemia or red blood cell (RBC) transfusions. For the FN and anemia analyses, risk factors were identified from published literature and used to classify patients into FN and anemia risk categories. Subgroup analysis based on age was also performed on patient reported outcome (PRO) measures. RESULTS: In total, 123 patients received trilaciclib and 119 patients received placebo. Myeloprotective benefits of trilaciclib were observed regardless of age, with greater effects observed among patients aged ≥65 years. Across FN risk factors and categories, trilaciclib had beneficial effects on neutrophil-related endpoints vs placebo, with greater effects observed in patients at higher risk of FN. Effects on RBC-related endpoints favored trilaciclib vs placebo, regardless of anemia risk factors and categories. Improvements in PROs with trilaciclib were observed irrespective of age group, but with greater improvements and less deterioration from baseline observed in older patients. CONCLUSION: By both decreasing the incidence of CIM and improving quality of life, trilaciclib has the potential to allow patients receiving chemotherapy for ES-SCLC, including patients who are older or more vulnerable to CIM, to receive chemotherapy on schedule and at standard-of-care doses, and to improve the experience for patients receiving chemotherapy to treat ES-SCLC. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBERS: NCT02499770; NCT03041311; NCT02514447.

Effects of Trilaciclib on Chemotherapy-Induced Myelosuppression and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients with Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer: Pooled Results from Three Phase II Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Studies.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression (CIM) and its sequalae cause significant side effects and harm to quality of life. Trilaciclib is an intravenous CDK4/6 inhibitor that is administered prior to chemotherapy to protect hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells from chemotherapy-induced damage (myeloprotection). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (NCT02499770, NCT03041311, and NCT02514447) were pooled to evaluate the effects of trilaciclib administered prior to standard-of-care chemotherapy (first-line etoposide plus carboplatin [E/P], first-line E/P plus atezolizumab, and second-/third-line topotecan) in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). The primary endpoints were duration of severe neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count < 0.5 × 109 cells/L) in cycle 1 and occurrence of severe neutropenia. Additional prespecified endpoints further assessed the effect of trilaciclib on myeloprotection, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), antitumor efficacy, and safety. RESULTS: Of 242 randomized patients, 123 received trilaciclib and 119 received placebo. Compared with placebo, administration of trilaciclib prior to chemotherapy resulted in significant decreases in most measures of multilineage CIM. The reduction in hematologic toxicity translated into the reduced need for supportive care interventions and hospitalizations due to CIM or sepsis and improvements in HRQoL domains related to the protected cell lineages, including fatigue, physical wellbeing, and functional wellbeing. Antitumor efficacy was similar for patients receiving trilaciclib or placebo. CONCLUSION: Administering trilaciclib prior to chemotherapy resulted in clinically meaningful reductions in CIM and its consequences and improved patient HRQoL, with no impact on the antitumor efficacy of three individual chemotherapy regimens used in the first- or second-/third-line treatment of ES-SCLC.

Trilaciclib prior to chemotherapy reduces the usage of supportive care interventions for chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression in patients with small cell lung cancer: Pooled analysis of three randomized phase 2 trials.

BACKGROUND: Supportive care interventions used to manage chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression (CIM), including granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs), erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs), and red blood cell (RBC) transfusions, are burdensome to patients and associated with greater costs to health care systems. We evaluated the utilization of supportive care interventions and their relationship with the myeloprotective agent, trilaciclib. METHODS: Data were pooled from three independent randomized phase 2 clinical trials of trilaciclib or placebo administered prior to chemotherapy in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). The impact of supportive care on the duration of severe neutropenia (DSN), occurrence of severe neutropenia (SN), and occurrence of RBC transfusions on/after week 5 was analyzed across cycles 1-4. Concordance and association between grade 3/4 anemia, RBC transfusions on/after week 5, and ESA administration was also evaluated. RESULTS: The use of G-CSFs, ESAs, or RBC transfusions on/after week 5 was significantly lower among patients receiving trilaciclib versus placebo (28.5% vs. 56.3%, p < 0.0001; 3.3% vs. 11.8%, p = 0.0254; and 14.6% vs. 26.1%, p = 0.0252, respectively). Compared with placebo, trilaciclib significantly reduced DSN and SN, irrespective of G-CSF administration. RBC transfusions and ESAs were most often administered in patients with grade 3/4 anemia; however, patients typically received RBC transfusions over ESA administration. CONCLUSIONS: By improving CIM and reducing the need for associated supportive care, trilaciclib has the potential to reduce the burden of myelosuppression on patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy for the treatment of ES-SCLC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02499770; NCT03041311; NCT02514447).

Baseline observation carry forward: reasoning, properties, and practical issues.

In some longitudinal drug studies, regulatory agencies suggest baseline observation carry forward (BOCF) as a method of handling patient dropout, despite the existence of many criticisms to BOCF. The reason for using BOCF is not clear to many users who either treat BOCF as an imputation method or consider BOCF to be "conservative" in the sense that it allows treatment effect to be evaluated with a severe penalty for dropouts. In this article we address the following questions and issues: What is the reason for using BOCF? Is BOCF a conservative approach to assessing drug efficacy? Is BOCF reasonable? If not, what are the alternatives? Our discussions are based on both theoretical and practical viewpoints.

A randomized, double-blind comparison of duloxetine and venlafaxine in the treatment of patients with major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials assessing antidepressant therapies typically include separate assessments of efficacy (benefit) and adverse events (risk). Global benefit-risk (GBR) assessment allows the simultaneous evaluation of both efficacy and adverse events. The objective was to compare the serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) duloxetine and venlafaxine using GBR assessment. METHODS: Data were combined from two similarly designed, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel group studies in which patients with major depressive disorder were randomized to either duloxetine 60 mg/day or venlafaxine extended release (XR) 150 mg/day (75 mg/day for the first 2 weeks) for a 6-week fixed dosing period followed by an additional 6 weeks of treatment in which the dose could be increased up to 120 mg/day for duloxetine and 225 mg/day for venlafaxine. Patients completing the study (or receiving study drug for 2 weeks or more) were eligible to enter a taper period where the dose of study drug was gradually reduced over 1-2 weeks prior to drug discontinuation. The primary outcome measure (defined a priori) was the GBR comparison of duloxetine 60 mg/day and venlafaxine XR 150 mg/day after 6 weeks of treatment. In the GBR analysis, benefit was defined as remission at endpoint [17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD17) 7]. Risk was defined by four categories: patients having either no adverse events (AEs), AEs with no severity rating greater than moderate, AEs with at least one severity rating of severe, or having discontinued with a reason of self-reported adverse event (regardless of any AE severity). Additional efficacy measures included HAMD17 total score and subscales, HAMA, CGI-S, and PGI-I. Safety and tolerability were assessed via analysis of reasons for discontinuation, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), discontinuation-emergent adverse events, and changes in vital signs, weight, and laboratory analytes. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between duloxetine 60 mg/day and venlafaxine 150 mg/day as measured by GBR assessment at the end of 6 weeks (-1.418 vs. -1.079, P = 0.217) or 12 weeks (-0.349 vs. -0.121, P = 0.440), nor were there significant differences between treatment groups on the majority of efficacy measures. Significantly more venlafaxine-treated patients (74.5%) completed 12 weeks of treatment compared with duloxetine-treated patients (64.8%, P =.006). Nausea was the most common treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) for both drugs, and was significantly higher with duloxetine 60 mg/day compared to venlafaxine 150 mg/day during the first 6 weeks of treatment (43.6% vs. 35.0%, P0.05). During the taper period, significantly more venlafaxine-treated patients reported discontinuation-emergent adverse events (DEAEs) than duloxetine-treated patients. From a safety perspective, significantly more venlafaxine-treated patients (n = 4) than duloxetine-treated patients (n=0, P =.047) experienced sustained elevations of systolic blood pressure during the fixed dosing period. Otherwise, there were few significant differences in safety measures found between treatment groups during 6 and 12 weeks of therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Duloxetine 60 mg/day and venlafaxine XR 150 mg/day have similar benefit-risk profiles on the basis of a comparison utilizing GBR assessment. The implications of the more subtle differences between these drugs, as well as for interpreting the GBR assessment, are discussed.

Clinical evidence for serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibition of duloxetine.

Most antidepressants in clinical use are believed to function by enhancing neurotransmission of serotonin [5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT)] and/or norepinephrine (NE) via inhibition of neurotransmitter reuptake. Agents that affect reuptake of both 5-HT and NE (serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors) have been postulated to offer greater efficacy for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). These dual-acting agents also display a broader spectrum of action, including efficacy for MDD and associated painful physical symptoms, diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain, generalized anxiety disorder, and fibromyalgia syndrome. Substantial preclinical evidence shows that duloxetine, an approved drug for the treatment of MDD, generalized anxiety disorder, and the management of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain, inhibits reuptake of both 5-HT and NE. This paper reviews clinical and neurochemical evidence of duloxetine's effects on 5-HT and NE reuptake inhibition. The clinical evidence supporting duloxetine's effects on NE reuptake inhibition includes indirect measures such as altered excretion of NE metabolites, cardiovascular effects, and treatment-emergent adverse event profiles similar to those for other drugs believed to act through the inhibition of NE reuptake. In summary, the data presented in this report provide clinical evidence of a mechanism for duloxetine involving both 5-HT and NE reuptake inhibition in humans and are consistent with preclinical evidence for 5-HT/NE reuptake inhibition.

Global benefit-risk assessment in designing clinical trials and some statistical considerations of the method.

When characterizing a therapy, the efficacy and the safety are two major aspects under consideration. In prescribing a therapy to a patient, a clinician puts the two aspects together and makes a decision based on a consolidated thought process. The global benefit-risk (GBR) measures proposed by Chuang-Stein et al. (Stat. Med. 1991; 10:1349-1359) are useful in facilitating the thinking, and creating the framework for making statistical comparisons based on benefit-risk point of view. This article describes how a GBR linear score was defined and used as the primary outcome measure in a clinical trial design. The robustness of the definitions of 'benefit' and 'risk' are evaluated using different criteria. The sensitivity of the pre-specified weights is also analyzed using alternative weights; one of those was determined by the relative to an identified distribution integral transformation approach (Biometrics 1958; 14:18-38). Statistical considerations are illustrated using pooled data from clinical trials studying antidepressant. The pros and cons for using GBR assessments in the setting of clinical trials are discussed.

Use of effect size to determine optimal dose of duloxetine in major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: At effective doses, patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) treated with duloxetine have been found to experience significant symptom improvement as measured by HAMD(17) total score. In addition, duloxetine-treated patients have significantly higher remission and response rates compared with placebo. The objective of this analysis is to determine the optimal dose of duloxetine in MDD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Effect size for duloxetine 40mg, 60mg, 80mg, and 120mg per day were estimated using all 6 acute phase III clinical trials in patients with MDD. The tolerability of duloxetine 40mg, 60mg, 80mg, and 120mg were evaluated using pooled data from the 6 studies. The primary efficacy measure in all trials was the HAMD(17) total score, from which were determined the effect size for HAMD(17) change scores, response rates (50% reduction from baseline to endpoint), and remission rates (HAMD(17) total score < or =7). RESULTS: A total of 1619 randomized patients were included in these studies, of which 632 were treated with placebo; 177 with duloxetine 40mg/day; 251 with 60mg/day; 363 with 80mg/day; and 196 with 120mg/day. An evaluation of increments in effect size between doses consistently showed that the most notable gain in effect size for efficacy was the 40-60mg/day dosage range. All dosages from 60 to 120mg were effective. The tolerability assessment indicated duloxetine at 40-120mg/day is well tolerated. Furthermore, the initial doses of 40-80mg/day were found to have comparable tolerability. CONCLUSIONS: The effect size analyses demonstrate that duloxetine 40mg has minimum efficacy, and that duloxetine 60-120mg/day is effective in the treatment of patients with MDD. An initial dose less than 60mg/day might provide better tolerability for some patients diagnosed with MDD.

Duloxetine for the treatment of fibromyalgia in women: pooled results from two randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: To assess the efficacy (in particular, in pain, functional impairment, and quality of life) and safety and tolerability (incidence of adverse events, discontinuation rates, changes in laboratory findings, and vital signs) of duloxetine in female patients with fibromyalgia. METHODS: Data were pooled from two placebo-controlled clinical trials of similar design (randomized, 12-week, and double-blind), comparing duloxetine 60 mg a day (q.d.) or 60 mg twice daily (b.i.d.) (n = 326) with placebo (n = 212), in women who met the American College of Rheumatology criteria for primary fibromyalgia. RESULTS: Compared with the patients receiving placebo, duloxetine-treated female patients demonstrated a significantly greater improvement in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) average pain severity score and in the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) total score, beginning at week 1 and continuing through week 12 (p < 0.001). Duloxetine was superior to placebo on all efficacy measures, including mean tender point threshold, Clinical Global Impression of Severity, Patient Global Impression of Improvement, and average interference from pain scores. The duloxetine-treated group was superior to placebo on all quality of life and functional measures, including each domain of the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36). A direct treatment effect of duloxetine on pain reduction was demonstrated and shown to be independent of secondary improvement in mood (based on BPI average pain score). Significantly more duloxetine-treated patients reported treatment-emergent adverse events (296 [90.8%] duloxetine-treated and 165 [77.8%] placebo-treated, p < 0.001). Rates of serious adverse events were similar between duloxetine-treated and placebo-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: The pooled results of these studies demonstrate that duloxetine is a safe and efficacious treatment for both the pain and functional impairment associated with fibromyalgia in female patients, while significantly improving quality of life.