Two years of sarilumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to MTX: safety, efficacy and radiographic outcomes.

Objectives: To examine 2-year safety, efficacy and radiographic outcomes of sarilumab in adults with RA and inadequate response to MTX (MTX-IR). Methods: In the randomized, placebo-controlled MOBILITY trial, MTX-IR patients received subcutaneous sarilumab (150 or 200 mg) or placebo every 2 weeks (q2w) plus MTX for up to 1 year. Upon study completion, patients could enrol in the open-label, long-term extension study (EXTEND, NCT011046652), in which all patients received sarilumab 200 mg q2w plus MTX. Dose reduction to 150 mg q2w was allowed for abnormal laboratory findings and per investigator's discretion. Results: Of 1197 patients participating in MOBILITY, 901 entered EXTEND. Over the 2-year period, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and serious AEs occurred at rates of 279.6 events per 100 patient-years and 16.6 events per 100 patient-years, respectively. The most common TEAEs were neutropenia, injection site erythema, increased alanine aminotransferase and upper respiratory tract infections. After 1 year in the open-label, long-term extension, disease activity reached similar levels regardless of initial treatment. Modified total Sharp scores at year 1 were maintained through year 2. Best radiographic outcomes were observed in patients initially randomized to sarilumab 200 mg q2w. After dose reduction, 89.4% of patients continued the study through 2 years. Conclusion: Sarilumab safety through year 2 was consistent with IL-6 receptor blockade. Clinical response was similar irrespective of initial treatment, and radiographic progression stabilized. Patients initiated on sarilumab 200 mg q2w had the best radiographic outcomes. Dose reduction allowed most patients to continue with the study.

Efficacy and safety of sarilumab monotherapy versus adalimumab monotherapy for the treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (MONARCH): a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group phase III trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare efficacy and safety of sarilumab monotherapy with adalimumab monotherapy in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who should not continue treatment with methotrexate (MTX) due to intolerance or inadequate response. METHODS: MONARCH was a randomised, active-controlled, double-blind, double-dummy, phase III superiority trial. Patients received sarilumab (200 mg every 2 weeks (q2w)) or adalimumab (40 mg q2w) monotherapy for 24 weeks. The primary end point was change from baseline in 28-joint disease activity score using erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) at week 24. RESULTS: Sarilumab was superior to adalimumab in the primary end point of change from baseline in DAS28-ESR (-3.28 vs -2.20; p<0.0001). Sarilumab-treated patients achieved significantly higher American College of Rheumatology 20/50/70 response rates (sarilumab: 71.7%/45.7%/23.4%; adalimumab: 58.4%/29.7%/11.9%; all p≤0.0074) and had significantly greater improvement in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (p=0.0037). Importantly, at week 24, more patients receiving sarilumab compared with adalimumab achieved Clinical Disease Activity Index remission (7.1% vs 2.7%; nominal p=0.0468) and low disease activity (41.8% vs 24.9%; nominal p=0.0005, supplemental analysis). Adverse events occurred in 63.6% (adalimumab) and 64.1% (sarilumab) of patients, the most common being neutropenia and injection site reactions (sarilumab) and headache and worsening RA (adalimumab). Incidences of infections (sarilumab: 28.8%; adalimumab: 27.7%) and serious infections (1.1%, both groups) were similar, despite neutropenia differences. CONCLUSIONS: Sarilumab monotherapy demonstrated superiority to adalimumab monotherapy by improving the signs and symptoms and physical functions in patients with RA who were unable to continue MTX treatment. The safety profiles of both therapies were consistent with anticipated class effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02332590.

Sarilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody against IL-6Rα in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to methotrexate: efficacy and safety results from the randomised SARIL-RA-MOBILITY Part A trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate safety and efficacy of weekly (qw) and every other week (q2w) dosing of sarilumab, a fully human anti-interleukin 6 receptor α (anti-IL-6Rα) monoclonal antibody, for moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: In this dose-ranging study, patients (n=306) with active RA, despite methotrexate, were randomly assigned to placebo or one of five subcutaneous doses/regimens of sarilumab: 100 mg q2w, 150 mg q2w, 100 mg qw, 200 mg q2w, 150 mg qw for 12 weeks, plus methotrexate. The primary end point was ACR20 at Week 12. Secondary endpoints included ACR50, ACR70, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (C reactive protein). Safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and efficacy in population subgroups were assessed. RESULTS: The proportion of patients achieving an ACR20 response compared with placebo was significantly higher for sarilumab 150 mg qw (72.0% vs 46.2%, multiplicity adjusted p=0.0203). Higher ACR20 responses were also attained with 150 mg q2w (67%; unadjusted (nominal) p=0.0363) and 200 mg q2w (65%; unadjusted p=0.0426) versus placebo. Sarilumab ≥150 mg q2w reduced C reactive protein, which did not return to baseline between dosing intervals. Infections were the most common adverse event; none were serious. Changes in laboratory values (neutropenia, transaminases and lipids) were consistent with reports with other IL-6Rα inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: Sarilumab improved signs and symptoms of RA over 12 weeks in patients with moderate-to-severe RA with a safety profile similar to reports with other IL-6 inhibitors. Sarilumab 150 mg and sarilumab 200 mg q2w had the most favourable efficacy, safety and dosing convenience and are being further evaluated in Phase III.

Clinical studies of the DP1 antagonist laropiprant in asthma and allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Prostaglandin D(2) is a proinflammatory mediator believed to be important in asthma and allergic rhinitis (AR). Allelic variants in the prostaglandin D(2) receptor type 1 (DP1) gene (PTGDR) have been suggested to be associated with asthma susceptibility. OBJECTIVES: We sought to investigate the efficacy of the DP1 antagonist laropiprant (alone or with montelukast) in asthma and seasonal AR and explore whether sequence variations in PTGDR are associated with asthma severity. METHODS: For asthma, in a double-blind crossover study, 100 patients with persistent asthma were randomized to placebo or laropiprant, 300 mg/d for 3 weeks, followed by addition of montelukast, 10 mg/d for 2 weeks. PTGDR promoter haplotypes were categorized as high, medium, or low transcriptional efficiency. The primary efficacy end point was FEV(1). For AR, in a double-blind parallel-group study, 767 patients sensitized to a regionally prevalent fall allergen with symptomatic fall rhinitis were allocated to laropiprant, 25 mg/d or 100 mg/d; cetirizine, 10mg/d; or placebo for 2 weeks. The primary end point was the Daytime Nasal Symptoms Score. RESULTS: For asthma, no significant differences in FEV(1) or asthma symptoms were noted for laropiprant versus placebo or laropiprant plus montelukast vs montelukast (differences between montelukast and placebo: P

Patient-reported outcomes from a randomized phase III trial of sarilumab monotherapy versus adalimumab monotherapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: The phase III MONARCH randomized controlled trial (NCT02332590) demonstrated that in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), sarilumab (anti-interleukin-6 receptor monoclonal antibody) monotherapy is superior to adalimumab monotherapy in reducing disease activity and signs and symptoms of RA, as well as in improving physical function, with similar rates of adverse and serious adverse events. We report the effects of sarilumab versus adalimumab on patient-reported outcomes (PROs). METHODS: Patients with active RA intolerant of, or inadequate responders to, methotrexate were randomized to sarilumab 200 mg plus placebo every 2 weeks (q2w; n = 184) or adalimumab 40 mg plus placebo q2w (n = 185). Dose escalation to weekly administration of adalimumab or matching placebo was permitted at week 16. PROs assessed at baseline and weeks 12 and 24 included patient global assessment of disease activity (PtGA), pain and morning stiffness visual analogue scales (VASs), Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), Rheumatoid Arthritis Impact of Disease (RAID), and rheumatoid arthritis-specific Work Productivity Survey (WPS-RA). Between-group differences in least-squares mean (LSM) changes from baseline were analyzed. p < 0.05 was considered significant for PROs in a predefined hierarchy. For PROs not in the hierarchy, nominal p values are provided. Proportions of patients reporting improvements greater than or equal to the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and achieving normative values were assessed. RESULTS: At week 24, sarilumab treatment resulted in significantly greater LSM changes from baseline than adalimumab monotherapy in HAQ-DI (p < 0.005), PtGA (p < 0.001), pain VAS (p < 0.001), and SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS) (p < 0.001). Greater LSM changes were reported for sarilumab than for adalimumab in RAID (nominal p < 0.001), morning stiffness VAS (nominal p < 0.05), and WPS-RA (nominal p < 0.005). Between-group differences in FACIT-F and SF-36 Mental Component Summary (MCS) were not significant. More patients reported improvements greater than or equal to the MCID in HAQ-DI (nominal p < 0.01), RAID (nominal p < 0.01), SF-36 PCS (nominal p < 0.005), and morning stiffness (nominal p < 0.05), as well as greater than or equal to the normative values in HAQ-DI (p < 0.05), with sarilumab versus adalimumab. CONCLUSIONS: In parallel with the clinical efficacy profile previously reported, sarilumab monotherapy resulted in greater improvements across multiple PROs than adalimumab monotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02332590 . Registered on 5 January 2015.

Sarilumab and Nonbiologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs in Patients With Active Rheumatoid Arthritis and Inadequate Response or Intolerance to Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of sarilumab plus conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in patients with active moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had an inadequate response or intolerance to anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy. METHODS: Patients were randomly allocated to receive sarilumab 150 mg, sarilumab 200 mg, or placebo every 2 weeks for 24 weeks with background conventional synthetic DMARDs. The co-primary end points were the proportion of patients achieving a response according to the American College of Rheumatology 20% criteria for improvement (ACR20) at week 24, and change from baseline in the Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index (HAQ DI) at week 12. Each sarilumab dose was evaluated against placebo; differences between the 2 sarilumab doses were not assessed. RESULTS: The baseline characteristics of the treatment groups were similar. The ACR20 response rate at week 24 was significantly higher with sarilumab 150 mg and sarilumab 200 mg every 2 weeks compared with placebo (55.8%, 60.9%, and 33.7%, respectively; P < 0.0001). The mean change from baseline in the HAQ DI score at week 12 was significantly greater for sarilumab (least squares mean change: for 150 mg, -0.46 [P = 0.0007]; for 200 mg, -0.47 [P = 0.0004]) versus placebo (-0.26). Infections were the most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events. Serious infections occurred in 1.1%, 0.6%, and 1.1% of patients receiving placebo, sarilumab 150 mg, and sarilumab 200 mg, respectively. Laboratory abnormalities included decreased absolute neutrophil count and increased transaminase levels in both sarilumab groups compared with placebo. In this study, reductions in the absolute neutrophil count were not associated with an increased incidence of infections or serious infections. CONCLUSION: Sarilumab 150 mg and sarilumab 200 mg every 2 weeks plus conventional synthetic DMARDs improved the signs and symptoms of RA and physical function in patients with an inadequate response or intolerance to anti-TNF agents. Safety data were consistent with interleukin-6 receptor blockade and the known safety profile of sarilumab.

Sarilumab plus methotrexate suppresses circulating biomarkers of bone resorption and synovial damage in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to methotrexate: a biomarker study of MOBILITY.

BACKGROUND: Interleukin 6 (IL-6) signaling plays a key role in the pathophysiology of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and is inhibited by sarilumab, a human monoclonal antibody blocking the IL-6 receptor alpha (IL-6Rα). The effects of sarilumab plus methotrexate (MTX) on serum biomarkers of joint damage and bone resorption were assessed in two independent studies (phase II (part A) and phase III (part B)) of patients with RA with a history of inadequate response to MTX from the MOBILITY study (NCT01061736). METHODS: Serum samples were analyzed at baseline and prespecified posttreatment time points. Biomarkers of tissue destruction, cartilage degradation, and synovial inflammation were measured in part A; assessment of these markers was repeated in part B and included additional analysis of biomarkers of bone formation and resorption (including soluble receptor activator of nuclear factor-kB ligand (sRANKL)). A mixed model for repeated measures was used to compare treatment effects on change in biomarkers. Additionally, changes from baseline in biomarkers were compared between American College of Rheumatology 50 % responders and nonresponders and between patients who achieved or did not achieve low disease activity (LDA), separately by treatment group, at week 24. RESULTS: In part A, sarilumab 150 and 200 mg every 2 weeks (q2w) significantly reduced biomarkers of tissue destruction, cartilage degradation, and synovial inflammation at both 2 and 12 weeks posttreatment (p < 0.05 vs placebo). These results were replicated in part B, with markers of these damaging processes reduced at weeks 2 and 24 (p < 0.05 vs placebo). Additionally, sarilumab 200 mg q2w significantly reduced both sRANKL and sRANKL/osteoprotegerin ratio at week 24 (p < 0.01 vs placebo). Trends for reduction were noted for several biomarkers in patients who achieved LDA compared with those who did not. CONCLUSIONS: Sarilumab plus MTX significantly suppressed biomarkers of bone resorption and joint damage, as compared with placebo plus MTX, in patients with RA. Additional work is needed to determine whether differences in biomarker profiles at baseline or posttreatment can identify patients who achieve improvement in disease activity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01061736 , February 2, 2010.

Safety, tolerability, and exploratory efficacy of montelukast in 6- to 24-month-old patients with asthma.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the safety and tolerability profile of montelukast 4-mg oral granules compared with placebo in children aged 6-24 months with asthma. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study. Children 6-24 months of age at first visit with a history of at least three episodes of physician-diagnosed asthma or 'asthma-like' symptoms and in need of controller therapy were randomized to either montelukast 4-mg oral granules or placebo once daily in the evening for 6 weeks. The primary variables were the frequency of clinical and laboratory adverse experiences. The exploratory efficacy endpoints included days without beta-agonist use, beta-agonist use per day, unscheduled physician or hospital visits for asthma, oral corticosteroid rescues for asthma, asthma attacks, discontinuation due to worsening of asthma, and total blood peripheral eosinophil counts. RESULTS: The most common clinical adverse experiences were upper respiratory tract infection, asthma, fever, diarrhea, and vomiting occurring with similar frequencies between treatment groups. There were no clinically meaningful differences between the two treatment groups in clinical or laboratory adverse experiences and no significant differences in frequency of patients with elevated serum transaminases. Differences between the montelukast and placebo treatment groups in the exploratory efficacy endpoints of days without beta-agonist use, oral corticosteroid rescues, emergency care, asthma attacks, and discontinuations due to worsening asthma were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Montelukast, 4-mg oral granules, was well tolerated over 6 weeks of treatment in children aged 6-24 months with asthma.

Sarilumab Plus Methotrexate in Patients With Active Rheumatoid Arthritis and Inadequate Response to Methotrexate: Results of a Phase III Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of sarilumab in combination with methotrexate (MTX) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Adults with moderate-to-severe RA and an inadequate response to MTX were randomized (1:1:1) to receive sarilumab (doses of 150 mg or 200 mg) or placebo every 2 weeks in conjunction with weekly MTX for 52 weeks. Co-primary end points were the proportion of patients achieving American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) improvement responses at week 24, change from baseline in the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability index (DI) at week 16, and change from baseline in the modified Sharp/van der Heijde score (SHS) of radiographic damage at week 52. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar among the groups. For all 3 co-primary end points, the sarilumab 150 mg and 200 mg groups demonstrated statistically significant improvements as compared with the placebo group (ACR20 response rate at week 24, 58.0%, 66.4%, and 33.4%, respectively [P < 0.0001]; least squares mean change in HAQ DI at week 16, -0.53, -0.55, and -0.29, respectively [P < 0.0001]; and mean change in SHS at week 52, 0.90, 0.25, and 2.78, respectively [P < 0.0001]). The most common treatment-emergent adverse event was infection. In the sarilumab 150 mg, sarilumab 200 mg, and placebo groups, the incidence of serious infections was 2.6%, 4.0%, and 2.3%, respectively. Elevations in alanine aminotransferase levels >3-fold the upper limit of normal occurred in 9.5%, 8.0%, and 2.1% of patients, respectively; in 24 patients, this led to discontinuation of treatment. Elevated total cholesterol levels were observed in 36.8%, 43.0%, and 18.3% of patients, respectively. In patients receiving 150 mg and 200 mg sarilumab, neutrophil counts of 0.5 to <1.0 × 10(9) /liter were observed in 5.1% and 7.8% of patients, respectively, while neutrophil counts of <0.5 × 10(9) /liter were observed in 0.9% and 0.7% of patients, respectively; none of the patients receiving placebo experienced changes in neutrophil counts. CONCLUSION: In RA patients treated with sarilumab (150 mg or 200 mg every 2 weeks) in combination with MTX, both doses provided sustained clinical efficacy, as shown by significant improvements in symptomatic, functional, and radiographic outcomes. Sarilumab was generally well tolerated. The adverse events observed in this study were consistent with the effects of interleukin-6 signaling blockade.

Pharmacokinetics of montelukast in asthmatic patients 6 to 24 months old.

Montelukast is a cysteinyl leukotriene receptor antagonist approved for the treatment of asthma for those ages 1 year old to adult. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetic comparability of a 4-mg dose of montelukast oral granules in patients > or = 6 to < 24 months old to the 10-mg approved dose in adults. This was an open-label study in 32 patients. Population pharmacokinetic parameters included estimates of AUC(pop), C(max), and t(max). Results were compared with estimates from adults (10-mg film-coated tablet [FCT]). Dose selection criteria were for the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the AUC(pop) estimate ratio (pediatric/adult 10 mg FCT) to be within comparability bounds of (0.5, 2.00). The AUC(pop) ratio and the 95% CI for children compared with adults were within the predefined comparability bounds. Observed plasma concentrations were also similar. Based on systemic exposure of montelukast, a 4-mg dose of montelukast appears appropriate for children as young as 6 months of age.

Systematic review of trials of the effect of continued use of oral non-selective NSAIDs on blood pressure and hypertension.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of continued use of non-selective NSAIDs (nsNSAIDs) on blood pressure and hypertension. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a systematic review of randomized clinical trials of oral nsNSAIDs used for at least a 4-week duration. Searches were conducted of PubMed and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, using key terms for nsNSAIDs and blood pressure or hypertension, to identify articles published in the English language peer-reviewed literature through March 2007. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Change from baseline to end of study in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and the incidence of hypertension. Pooled statistics were computed using fixed and random-effects analyses. RESULTS: Thirty-two articles were included. The mean change (95% confidence interval [CI]) in blood pressure (in mmHg) from baseline to end of study for five trials of ibuprofen was 3.54 (2.70, 4.39) for SBP and 1.16 (0.68, 1.64) for DBP (p < 0.001 for both changes). Results of four trials of indomethacin were similar to those for ibuprofen: 2.90 (-0.28, 6.08) for SBP (p = 0.07) and 1.58 (0.29, 2.87) for DBP (p = 0.02). Mean changes from baseline for two trials of diclofenac were -0.46 (-1.48, 0.56) for SBP (p = 0.38) and -0.56 (-1.19, 0.07) for DBP (p = 0.08) and were similar to those for placebo. Changes from baseline in SBP were positive but not statistically significant for naproxen, sulindac, and nabumetone. Compared with placebo, the risk ratio (95% CI) for hypertension was 2.85 (1.44, 5.65; p = 0.003) in two ibuprofen trials. CONCLUSIONS: Continued use of ibuprofen increases blood pressure and raises the incidence of hypertension. There appears to be heterogeneity in such effects with continued use of other nsNSAIDs but, due to limitations in the data, results for naproxen, sulindac, and nabumetone are inconclusive.

The VIOXX in Prostate Cancer Prevention study: cardiovascular events observed in the rofecoxib 25 mg and placebo treatment groups.

BACKGROUND: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study was designed to determine the cumulative incidence of developing prostate cancer over 6 years of treatment with rofecoxib 25 mg/day versus placebo. Before completion, this trial was terminated following the voluntary withdrawal of rofecoxib. (On September 30, 2004, Merck & Co., Inc. announced the voluntary worldwide withdrawal of rofecoxib from the market.) Here we report the cardiovascular (CV) safety data collected from this study. METHODS: A total of 4741 men (44-81 years old) exhibiting prostate-specific antigen levels (PSA) between 2.5 and 10 ng/mL were enrolled. Patients were stratified by PSA level and use of low-dose aspirin (LDA), then randomized to rofecoxib 25 mg (n = 2369) or placebo (n = 2372). Safety data were analyzed in all patients receiving > or = 1 dose of study medication. All reported thrombotic CV events occurring on-treatment or within 14 days after study drug discontinuation were adjudicated by an independent panel of clinical experts blinded to treatment assignment. Rates per 100 patient-years and relative risk (RR) of thrombotic CV events, rofecoxib vs. placebo, were determined. RESULTS: Approximately 36% of patients had > or = 2 CV risk factors or LDA indicated. Median treatment duration was 4.14 (range: 0.03-15.90) months. Twenty-nine patients (14 rofecoxib, rate 1.27; 15 placebo, rate 1.36) experienced confirmed thrombotic CV events; RR 0.94 (95% CI: 0.45, 1.94) vs. placebo. Four patients (one rofecoxib; three placebo) died due to a confirmed thrombotic event. Significantly (p = 0.002) more patients receiving rofecoxib (n = 20; 0.8%) experienced hypertension-related adverse events versus placebo (n = 2; 0.1%). There were no cases of congestive heart failure. CONCLUSIONS: Rofecoxib 25 mg and placebo demonstrated similar risk of thrombotic CV events in this limited dataset.

Onset and duration of protection against exercise-induced bronchoconstriction by a single oral dose of montelukast.

BACKGROUND: Leukotriene modifiers have been shown to protect against exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) with repeated, chronic dosing. OBJECTIVE: To study the onset and duration of protection against EIB after a single dose of montelukast, a leukotriene receptor antagonist. METHODS: In this randomized, crossover, double-blind study, 51 adult asthma patients with EIB (> or = 20% postexercise decrease in forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1]) received a single oral dose of montelukast (10 mg), or placebo followed by exercise challenge 2, 12, and 24 hours after dosing. The primary end point was maximum percentage decrease in FEV1 from preexercise baseline during 60 minutes after the 2-hour challenge. RESULTS: At 2, 12, and 24 hours after dosing, the maximum decrease in FEV1 was 10.8% +/- 7.9%, 8.4% +/- 7.5%, and 8.3% +/- 7.3% for montelukast and 22.3% +/- 13.1%, 16.1% +/- 10.2%, and 16.9% +/- 11.7% for placebo, respectively (P < or = .001 at each time point). Postexercise recovery was quicker with montelukast than with placebo (P < or = .001); mean (95% confidence interval) differences were -26.8 minutes (-35.1 to -18.4 minutes), -16.0 minutes (-22.9 to -9.2 minutes), and -17.4 minutes (-24.9 to -9.9 minutes) at the 3 time points, respectively. At all time points, area under the curve for percentage decrease in FEV1 during 60 minutes after exercise was smaller after montelukast (P < or = .001); montelukast protected more patients against EIB (P < or = .001). Fewer patients required postexercise beta-agonist rescue at 2 hours after dosing with montelukast (P = .03). CONCLUSION: Montelukast provided significant protection against EIB as soon as 2 hours after a single oral dose, with persistent benefit up to 24 hours.

Randomized controlled trial evaluating the clinical benefit of montelukast for treating spring seasonal allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Symptoms of allergic rhinitis are mediated in part by cysteinyl leukotrienes. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical benefit of montelukast, a cysteinyl leukotriene receptor antagonist, administered once daily for treating seasonal allergic rhinitis. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled study enrolled 1,214 healthy, nonsmoking outpatients aged 15 to 85 years with spring allergic rhinitis, positive skin test to a spring allergen, and predefined daytime nasal symptoms. After a 3- to 5-day placebo run-in period, patients were randomly assigned to treatment with montelukast 10 mg (n = 522), loratadine 10 mg (n = 171), or placebo (n = 521) once daily at bedtime for 2 weeks. During the run-in and treatment periods, symptoms were evaluated in a daily diary using a 0 (best) to 3 (worst) scale. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of randomized patients were clinically similar in the three treatment groups. Montelukast was significantly more effective than placebo (P = 0.003) in improving the daytime nasal symptoms score (difference in least square means, -0.09; 95% confidence interval, -0.16, -0.03) averaged over 2 weeks of therapy. The treatment effect of montelukast was significantly greater (P < 0.05), relative to placebo, for all secondary endpoints, including nighttime symptoms and daytime eye symptoms, patient and physician global evaluations of allergic rhinitis, and rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life. Loratadine, which served as a positive control, was significantly more effective than placebo for most endpoints, validating the study results. Both montelukast and loratadine were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Therapy with montelukast significantly improves assessments of symptom severity as well as quality-of-life parameters for patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis.

Montelukast for treating fall allergic rhinitis: effect of pollen exposure in 3 studies.

BACKGROUND: Montelukast, a potent leukotriene receptor antagonist, is an effective therapy for symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis, a disease governed by patients' individual sensitivity and exposure to relevant allergens. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship of montelukast treatment effect vs pollen exposure in studies conducted during 3 consecutive fall allergy seasons. METHOD: A combined analysis of these multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group studies was performed; 1 of the 3 studies is presented for the first time in this article. After a placebo run-in period, 1,862 symptomatic patients were randomly assigned to receive either a 10-mg montelukast tablet (n = 929) or placebo (n = 933) once daily for 2 weeks. Pollen exposure was summarized by mean daily weed pollen count. The interaction between treatment effect and pollen exposure was evaluated on the primary efficacy endpoint and daytime nasal symptom score, as rated by patients; also evaluated was the influence of the timing of the 2-week treatment period relative to the peak of the weed pollen season. RESULTS: Montelukast significantly improved daytime nasal symptoms score and individual scores of congestion, rhinorrhea, itching, and sneezing compared with placebo. There was a significant interaction (P < .043) between treatment effect and weed pollen exposure; a larger treatment effect was noted in patients exposed to higher pollen counts. An interaction between treatment effect and timing of treatment in relation to peak pollen season was suggested. CONCLUSIONS: Montelukast significantly improved daytime nasal symptoms score in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis, and the effect was greater in patients exposed to higher pollen levels.