Effects of Bedtime Dosing With Suvorexant and Zolpidem on Balance and Psychomotor Performance in Healthy Elderly Participants During the Night and in the Morning.

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND: This study was designed as an early assessment of the safety of the orexin receptor antagonist suvorexant, but also included exploratory assessments of balance and psychomotor performance that are the focus of this report. METHODS/PROCEDURES: This was a double-blind, randomized, 3-period, crossover, phase 1 study. Balance and psychomotor performance were evaluated during the night in 12 healthy elderly participants after bedtime administration of suvorexant 30 mg (a supratherapeutic dose), the GABAergic agonist zolpidem 5 mg (the recommended dose in the elderly), or placebo. Balance (body sway measured by platform stability) and psychomotor performance (measured by choice reaction time) were assessed predose and at 1.5, 4, and 8 hours postdose in each period. Memory (measured by word recall) was assessed predose and at 4 hours postdose. FINDINGS/RESULTS: At 1.5 hours after nighttime administration of each drug (the approximate time of their anticipated maximal plasma concentrations), both zolpidem and suvorexant increased body sway versus placebo, with a greater increase for zolpidem than suvorexant. Suvorexant increased choice reaction time compared with placebo or zolpidem at 1.5 hours. There were no treatment differences on body sway or choice reaction time at 4 or 8 hours, or on word recall at 4 hours. IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS: These exploratory data suggest that a 30-mg dose of suvorexant (supratherapeutic) and a 5-mg dose of zolpidem (recommended dose in the elderly) impaired balance at 1.5 hours in healthy elderly people, with potentially less impairment for suvorexant relative to zolpidem, but no treatment differences on body sway or psychomotor performance at 4 and 8 hours. Because of their exploratory nature, these findings and their clinical relevance, if any, require confirmation in a prospective study.

Use of the single-item Patient Global Impression-Severity scale as a self-reported assessment of insomnia severity.

We evaluated a single-item Patient Global Impression-Severity (PGI-S) scale for assessing insomnia severity during the clinical development programme for suvorexant. The analyses used data from two randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 3-month, Phase III clinical trials of suvorexant in patients with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV criteria insomnia. Patients assessed insomnia severity during the previous week using the PGI-S, a one-item questionnaire containing six response options ranging from 0 (none) to 5 (very severe), at baseline and at Week 2, and Months 1, 2, and 3 after randomisation. The seven-item Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) and other subjective and objective assessments were also completed by patients. PGI-S responses were compared primarily with the ISI using descriptive statistics and correlations. The PGI-S demonstrated favourable measurement characteristics (validity, reliability, responsiveness and sensitivity). PGI-S scores decreased from baseline to Month 3 in a similar pattern to the ISI total score, and the Spearman correlation coefficient between PGI-S and the ISI was .73. An improvement of ≥2 points on the PGI-S defined a treatment responder, based on comparison to the ISI definition of a responder (improvement of ≥6 points). Our present findings suggest that the PGI-S is a simple but valid, reliable, responsive, sensitive, and meaningful patient-reported assessment of insomnia severity. The PGI-S may be particularly useful as a companion outcome to sleep monitoring using wearable sleep devices or smartphones in at-home settings.

Pilot evaluation of a consumer wearable device to assess sleep in a clinical polysomnography trial of suvorexant for treating insomnia in patients with Alzheimer's disease.

The orexin receptor antagonist suvorexant was previously reported to significantly improve total sleep time (TST), by 28 min per night versus placebo after 4 weeks, in a sleep laboratory polysomnography (PSG) study of patients with Alzheimer's disease and insomnia. The study included an exploratory evaluation of a consumer-grade wearable "watch" device for assessing sleep that we report on here. Participants who met diagnostic criteria for both probable Alzheimer's disease dementia and insomnia were randomized to suvorexant 10-20 mg (N = 142) or placebo (N = 143) in a double-blind, 4-week trial. Patients were provided with a consumer-grade wearable watch device (Garmin vívosmart® HR) to be worn continuously. Overnight sleep laboratory PSG was performed on three nights: screening, baseline and Night 29 (last dose). Watch treatment effects were assessed by change-from-baseline in watch TST at Week 4 (average TST per night). We also analysed Night 29 data only, with watch data restricted to the PSG recording time. In the 193 participants included in the Week 4 watch analysis (suvorexant = 97, placebo = 96), the suvorexant-placebo difference in watch TST was 4 min (p = .622). In patients with usable data for both assessments at the baseline and Night 29 PSG (suvorexant = 57, placebo = 50), the watch overestimated TST compared to PSG (e.g., placebo baseline = 412 min for watch and 265 min for PSG) and underestimated change-from-baseline treatment effects: the suvorexant-placebo difference was 20 min for watch TST (p = .405) and 35 min for PSG TST (p = .057). These findings show that the watch was less sensitive than PSG for evaluating treatment effects on TST.

BACE inhibition causes rapid, regional, and non-progressive volume reduction in Alzheimer's disease brain.

In the phase 3 EPOCH trial (Clinicaltrials.gov; NCT01739348), treatment with the BACE inhibitor verubecestat failed to improve cognition in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease, but was associated with reduced hippocampal volume after 78 weeks as assessed by MRI. The aims of the present exploratory analyses were to: (i) characterize the effect of verubecestat on brain volume by evaluating the time course of volumetric MRI changes for a variety of brain regions; and (ii) understand the mechanism through which verubecestat might cause hippocampal (and other brain region) volume loss by assessing its relationship to measures of amyloid, neurodegeneration, and cognition. Participants were aged 55-85 years with probable Alzheimer's disease dementia and a Mini Mental State Examination score ≥15 and ≤26. MRIs were obtained at baseline and at Weeks 13, 26, 52 and 78 of treatment. MRIs were segmented using Freesurfer and analysed using a tensor-based morphometry method. PET amyloid data were obtained with 18F-flutemetamol (Vizamyl®) at baseline and Week 78. Standardized uptake value ratios were generated with subcortical white matter as a reference region. Neurofilament light chain in the CSF was assessed as a biomarker of neurodegeneration. Compared with placebo, verubecestat showed increased MRI brain volume loss at Week 13 with no evidence of additional loss through Week 78. The verubecestat-related volumetric MRI loss occurred predominantly in amyloid-rich brain regions. Correlations between amyloid burden at baseline and verubecestat-related volumetric MRI reductions were not significant (r = 0.05 to 0.26, P-values > 0.27). There were no significant differences between verubecestat and placebo in changes from baseline in CSF levels of neurofilament light chain at Week 78 (increases of 7.2 and 14.6 pg/ml for verubecestat versus 19.7 pg/ml for placebo, P-values ≥ 0.1). There was a moderate correlation between volumetric MRI changes and cognitive decline in all groups including placebo at Week 78 (e.g. r = -0.45 to -0.55, P < 0.001 for whole brain), but the correlations were smaller at Week 13 and significant only for the verubecestat groups (e.g. r = -0.15 and -0.11, P < 0.04 for whole brain). Our results suggest that the verubecestat-associated MRI brain volume loss is not due to generalized, progressive neurodegeneration, but may be mediated by specific effects on BACE-related amyloid processes.

Polysomnographic assessment of suvorexant in patients with probable Alzheimer's disease dementia and insomnia: a randomized trial.

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated the clinical profile of the orexin receptor antagonist suvorexant for treating insomnia in patients with mild-to-moderate probable Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia. METHODS: Randomized, double-blind, 4-week trial of suvorexant 10 mg (could be increased to 20 mg based on clinical response) or placebo in patients who met clinical diagnostic criteria for both probable AD dementia and insomnia. Sleep was assessed by overnight polysomnography in a sleep laboratory. The primary endpoint was change-from-baseline in polysomnography-derived total sleep time (TST) at week 4. RESULTS: Of 285 participants randomized (suvorexant, N = 142; placebo, N = 143), 277 (97%) completed the trial (suvorexant, N = 136; placebo, N = 141). At week 4, the model-based least squares mean improvement-from-baseline in TST was 73 minutes for suvorexant and 45 minutes for placebo; (difference = 28 minutes [95% confidence interval 11-45], p < 0.01). Somnolence was reported in 4.2% of suvorexant-treated patients and 1.4% of placebo-treated patients. DISCUSSION: Suvorexant improved TST in patients with probable AD dementia and insomnia.

Cognitive outcomes in trials of two BACE inhibitors in Alzheimer's disease.

INTRODUCTION: The APECS and AMARANTH trials showed that beta-secretase (BACE) inhibitors verubecestat and lanabecestat failed to slow cognitive and functional decline in individuals with prodromal or early Alzheimer's disease. Here, the performance on secondary and exploratory cognitive measures in both studies is reported. METHODS: APECS (verubecestat) and AMARANTH (lanabecestat) were randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, 104-week clinical trials conducted by different sponsors. Measures included the 3-Domain Composite Cognition Score (CCS-3D), Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS), Letter/Category Fluency, and Digit Symbol Coding. RESULTS: Verubecestat showed worsening on the CCS-3D Total Score, Episodic Memory, and Attention/Processing Speed domains. Lanabecestat showed worsening on the RBANS Total Score, Immediate Memory, and Visuospatial/Constructional Indexes. Both BACE inhibitors showed worsening on Digit Symbol Coding and improvements on Letter/Category Fluency. DISCUSSION: In both studies, many measures showed treatment-associated cognitive worsening, whereas verbal fluency tasks showed improvement.

Phase II Proof-of-Concept Trial of the Orexin Receptor Antagonist Filorexant (MK-6096) in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder.

Background: We evaluated the orexin receptor antagonist filorexant (MK-6096) for treatment augmentation in patients with major depressive disorder. Methods: We conducted a 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, Phase II, proof-of-concept study. Patients with major depressive disorder (partial responders to ongoing antidepressant therapy) were randomized 1:1 to once-daily oral filorexant 10 mg or matching placebo. Results: Due to enrollment challenges, the study was terminated early, resulting in insufficient statistical power to detect a prespecified treatment difference; of 326 patients planned, 129 (40%) were randomized and 128 took treatment. There was no statistically significant difference in the primary endpoint of change from baseline to week 6 in Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale total score; the estimated treatment difference for filorexant-placebo was -0.7 (with negative values favoring filorexant) (P=.679). The most common adverse events were somnolence and suicidal ideation. Conclusions: The interpretation of the results is limited by the enrollment, which was less than originally planned, but the available data do not suggest efficacy of orexin receptor antagonism with filorexant for the treatment of depression. (Clinical Trial Registry: clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01554176).

EEG spectral analysis of NREM sleep in a large sample of patients with insomnia and good sleepers: effects of age, sex and part of the night.

Previous studies of the differences between patients with insomnia and good sleepers with regard to quantitative electroencephalographic measures have mostly utilized small samples and consequently had limited ability to account for potentially important confounding factors of age, sex and part of the night. We conducted a power spectral analysis using a large database of sleep electroencephalographic recordings to evaluate differences between patients with insomnia (N = 803) and good sleepers (N = 811), while simultaneously accounting for these factors and their interaction. Comparisons of power as a function of age and part of the night were made between cohorts (patients with insomnia versus good sleepers) by sex. Absolute power in the delta, theta and sigma bands declined with age for both females and males. Females had significantly greater power than males at all ages, and for each band, cohort and part of the night. These sex differences were much greater than differences between patients with insomnia and good sleepers. Compared with good sleepers, patients with insomnia under age 40-45 years had reduced delta band power during Part 1 of the night. Females with insomnia over age 45 years had increased delta and theta band power in Parts 2 and 3 of the night, and males with insomnia under age 40 years had reduced theta power in Part 1. Females with insomnia had increased beta2 power in all parts of the night, and males with insomnia had reduced alpha power during all parts of the night. Relative power (the proportion that an individual frequency band contributes to the total power) decreased in the delta band and increased in all other bands with age for both cohorts, sexes and all parts of the night. This analysis provides a unique resource for quantitative information on the differences in power spectra between patients with insomnia and good sleepers accounting for age, sex and part of the night.

Suvorexant in Elderly Patients with Insomnia: Pooled Analyses of Data from Phase III Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials.

OBJECTIVE: Suvorexant is an orexin receptor antagonist approved for treating insomnia at doses of 10-20 mg. Previously reported phase III results showed that suvorexant was effective and well-tolerated in a combined-age population (elderly and nonelderly adults). The present analysis evaluated the clinical profile of suvorexant specifically in the elderly. METHODS: Prespecified subgroup analyses of pooled 3-month data from two (efficacy) and three (safety) randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trials. In each trial, elderly (≥65 years) patients with insomnia were randomized to suvorexant 30 mg, suvorexant 15 mg, and placebo. By design, fewer patients were randomized to 15 mg. Patient-reported and polysomnographic (subset of patients) sleep maintenance and onset endpoints were measured. RESULTS: Suvorexant 30 mg (N = 319) was effective compared with placebo (N = 318) on patient-reported and polysomnographic sleep maintenance, and onset endpoints at Night 1 (polysomnographic endpoints)/Week 1 (patient-reported endpoints), Month 1, and Month 3. Suvorexant 15 mg (N = 202 treated) was also effective across these measures, although the onset effect was less evident at later time points. The percentages of patients discontinuing because of adverse events over 3 months were 6.4% for 30 mg (N = 627 treated), 3.5% for 15 mg (N = 202 treated), and 5.5% for placebo (N = 469 treated). Somnolence was the most common adverse event (8.8% for 30 mg, 5.4% for 15 mg, 3.2% for placebo). CONCLUSION: Suvorexant generally improved sleep maintenance and onset over 3 months of nightly treatment and was well-tolerated in elderly patients with insomnia (clinicaltrials.gov; NCT01097616, NCT01097629, NCT01021813).

Randomized controlled trial of the CGRP receptor antagonist telcagepant for prevention of headache in women with perimenstrual migraine.

AIM: The aim of this article is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of perimenstrual telcagepant, a CGRP receptor antagonist, for headache prophylaxis. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, six-month trial in women with migraine for ≥ 3 months who experienced perimenstrual headaches. Women were randomized to telcagepant 140 mg or placebo (2:1 ratio) for seven consecutive days perimenstrually. Safety was assessed by adverse events and laboratory tests. The primary efficacy endpoint was mean monthly headache days in the subset of women reporting perimenstrual migraine (-2 days to +3 days of menses onset) and ≥ 5 moderate or severe migraines per month prior to entering the trial. RESULTS: Telcagepant was generally well tolerated: 66/2660 (2.5%) on telcagepant and 36/1326 (2.7%) on placebo discontinued because of a clinical adverse event. The percentages of patients with clinical adverse events, laboratory adverse events, or discontinuation because of a laboratory adverse event were also similar between treatments. Alanine aminotransferase elevations ≥ 3x normal occurred in 0.6% of women on telcagepant and 0.4% on placebo. Three women on telcagepant vs none on placebo had alanine aminotransferase elevations ≥ 8× normal. In the efficacy subset there was no significant effect of telcagepant (n = 887) vs placebo (n = 447) in mean monthly headache days (treatment difference -0.5 day (95% CI: -1.1, 0.1)). However, telcagepant was associated with a reduction in on-drug headache days (treatment difference -0.4 day (95% CI: -0.5, -0.2), nominal p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Telcagepant 140 mg taken perimenstrually for seven days was generally well tolerated, but was associated with transaminase elevations. Telcagepant did not reduce monthly headache frequency, but did reduce perimenstrual headaches.

Randomized controlled trial of the orexin receptor antagonist filorexant for migraine prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: This study explored whether antagonism of orexin receptors might be an effective mechanism for migraine prevention. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, pilot trial. Patients experiencing four to 14 days with migraine during a one-month baseline period were randomized to the orexin receptor antagonist filorexant 10 mg nightly or placebo for three months. Efficacy was assessed by mean monthly migraine days (headache plus at least one associated migraine symptom) and headache days. Safety and tolerability were assessed by adverse event reports and laboratory tests. RESULTS: Of 120 patients treated with filorexant and 115 treated with placebo, 97 (81%) and 101 (88%), respectively, completed the trial. There was no statistically significant difference between treatments for change from baseline in mean monthly migraine days (filorexant = -1.7, placebo = -1.3, difference = -0.4 (95% CI: -1.3, 0.4)) or headache days (filorexant = -1.7, placebo = -1.2, difference = -0.5 (95% CI: -1.4, 0.4)). Filorexant was generally well tolerated but was associated with a higher proportion of patients who reported adverse events than placebo (47% vs 37%), particularly somnolence (13% vs 4%). CONCLUSIONS: These data fail to provide evidence that antagonism of orexin receptors with filorexant, when administered at night, is effective for migraine prophylaxis.

Addition of an NK1 receptor antagonist to an SSRI did not enhance the antidepressant effects of SSRI monotherapy: results from a randomized clinical trial in patients with major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Aprepitant is a neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist approved for prevention of chemotherapy-induced and post-operative nausea and vomiting. Early studies demonstrated promising antidepressant activity as monotherapy, although this was unsupported by subsequent phase 3 trials. This phase 2 study evaluated whether aprepitant potentiated the antidepressant effects of paroxetine. METHODS: Outpatients with major depressive disorder were randomized to aprepitant 200 mg + paroxetine 20 mg, paroxetine + placebo, or aprepitant + placebo for 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was change in HAMD-17 total score. Secondary/exploratory endpoints included changes in HAMA, CGI-S, CGI-I, and HAMD Item-1 scores at week 6. RESULTS: A total of 79, 78, and 79 patients received aprepitant + paroxetine, paroxetine + placebo, and aprepitant + placebo, respectively. At week 6, mean changes in HAMD-17 were -11.0 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -12.7, -9.4), -11.7 (95% CI: -13.3, -10.0), and -9.5 (95% CI: -10.9, -8.1), respectively. Pairwise comparisons of HAMD-17 change with combination therapy versus paroxetine alone demonstrated no significant difference (p = 0.567). Changes in CGI-S, CGI-I, and HAMD Item-1 scores were also comparable, although there was a greater reduction in anxiety (HAMA) with paroxetine alone than aprepitant + paroxetine (p = 0.045). Adverse events were generally more common with the combination than either monotherapy. CONCLUSION: Concomitant use of aprepitant + paroxetine for 6 weeks did not provide greater antidepressant benefit compared with paroxetine + placebo in patients with major depression.

Lack of efficacy of L-759274, a novel neurokinin 1 (substance P) receptor antagonist, for the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder.

Preclinical studies suggest that substance P acting at neurokinin 1 (NK1) receptors may be involved in stress responses and NK1 receptor antagonists show activity in tests of anxiety. These data raise the possibility that NK1 receptor antagonists could be potential anxiolytic treatments in humans. We evaluated this hypothesis clinically using the NK1 antagonist L-759274. This is a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled, multicentre, proof-of-concept trial. Patients with generalized anxiety disorder were randomized 1:1:1 to 6 wk of treatment with 40 mg L-759274 (n = 73), 1-6 mg lorazepam (n = 69) or placebo (n = 71). Efficacy was assessed using the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA). A positron emission tomography (PET) study was also performed in 16 healthy subjects to determine the relationship between NK1 receptor occupancy and plasma levels of L-759274 to verify adequate target engagement by the doses tested during the clinical trial. No statistically significant difference in mean change from baseline HAMA score at 6 wk was seen for L-759274 vs. placebo [difference = 1.0 (95% confidence intervals (CI) -1.2 to 3.2), p = 0.359] whereas the lorazepam group did show a significant improvement vs. placebo (difference = -2.7, 95% CI -5.0 to -0.4, p = 0.020) and L-759274 (difference = 3.7, 95% CI 1.5-6.0, p = 0.001]. Results from the PET study indicated that the L-759274 dosing regimen used in the clinical trial likely provided high levels of NK1 receptor occupancy (>90%), supporting the view that it was an adequate proof-of-concept trial. The NK1 receptor antagonist L-759274 does not appear to be efficacious for the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder.

Long-term open-label safety study of rizatriptan acute treatment in pediatric migraineurs.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety/tolerability of rizatriptan in the long-term acute treatment of migraine in pediatric patients. BACKGROUND: Acute migraine treatment options for children are limited. A recent single-attack trial demonstrated that rizatriptan is effective in eliminating migraine headache pain in this population. We evaluated the long-term safety and efficacy of rizatriptan when used for intermittent acute treatment. METHODS: Open-label study in pediatric migraineurs ages 12-17 years. Patients weighing <40 kg received rizatriptan (orally disintegrating tablet) 5 mg, and those weighing ≥40 kg received 10 mg. Patients could treat up to 8 mild/moderate/severe migraine attacks per month for up to 12 months. One dose of study medication was allowed in a 24-hour period. RESULTS: A total of 674 patients were enrolled, and 606 patients were treated with study medication (N = 583 for 10 mg, N = 23 for 5 mg). The mean duration in the study was 292 days, and the mean number of doses of study medication taken was 20. Over the course of the study within 14 days post-any-dose, 66.0% (400) of the 606 treated patients had any adverse event, 2.3% (14) discontinued due to an adverse event, 2.6% (16) had a serious adverse event, and 23.4% (142) had a triptan-related adverse event. Of the 16 patients with serious adverse events within 14 days post-any-dose, the adverse events in 3 were considered drug-related; all 3 patient's adverse events were classified as serious only because they were associated with an overdose (use of >1 dose of study medication in a 24-hour period). The mean percentage of patient's attacks with pain freedom at 2-hours post-dose was 46.3%; this was relatively consistent over time (Months 1-3 = 43.7%, Months 4-6 = 51.9%, Months 7-9 = 49.9%, Months 10-12 = 49.5%). CONCLUSION: Rizatriptan was generally safe and well tolerated in the long-term acute treatment of migraine in pediatric patients aged 12-17 years and demonstrated a consistent treatment effect over time.

Randomized controlled study of the T-type calcium channel antagonist MK-8998 for the treatment of acute psychosis in patients with schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate whether the T-type calcium channel antagonist MK-8998 was effective in treating acute psychosis in patients with schizophrenia. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study. After a placebo lead-in, acutely psychotic inpatients with schizophrenia were randomized to 4 weeks of MK-8998 12/16 mg daily (N = 86), olanzapine 10/15 mg daily (N = 47), or placebo (N = 83). The primary efficacy measure was score on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). RESULTS: Out of 216 randomized patients, 158 completed the 4-week study: MK-8998 = 58 (67.4%), olanzapine = 38 (80.9%), and placebo = 62 (74.7%). The mean changes from baseline in PANSS score at week 4 for MK-8998 and olanzapine were not significantly different from placebo: MK-8998-placebo difference = -0.6 [95% confidence interval (CI): -7.0, 5.8], p = 0.9; olanzapine-placebo difference = -4.3 [95% CI: -11.7, 3.1), p = 0.3. A responder rate analysis (≥20% improvement from baseline in PANSS score) suggested an advantage of olanzapine over placebo (odds ratio = 2.20 [95% CI: 0.95, 5.09], p = 0.07) but no effect of MK-8998 over placebo (odds ratio = 1.28 [95% CI: 0.62, 2.64], p = 0.5). Treatments were generally well tolerated, but more patients reported adverse events for MK-8998 (47.7%) and olanzapine (48.9%) than placebo (37.3%). CONCLUSIONS: MK-8998 was not effective in treating acutely psychotic inpatients with schizophrenia, as measured by PANSS score at week 4. Because of the limited efficacy of the active comparator, we cannot exclude the possibility that T-type calcium channel antagonists could prove to be effective in schizophrenia.

Comparison of polysomnography in people with Alzheimer's disease and insomnia versus non-demented elderly people with insomnia.

BACKGROUND: We used baseline polysomnography (PSG) data obtained during the clinical program development for suvorexant to compare the PSG profiles of people with Alzheimer's disease and insomnia (ADI) versus age-matched elderly individuals with insomnia (EI). METHODS: Sleep laboratory baseline PSG data from participants age 55-80 years from 2 trials in people with insomnia and a trial in people with ADI were included. ADI participants had dementia of mild-to-moderate severity. Diagnostic criteria for insomnia, exclusion for other sleep problems, PSG recording procedures, and endpoint derivations were similar across the trials. All participants underwent a night of in-laboratory PSG prior to the baseline night to allow for screening/adaptation. Participants in the EI and ADI groups were compared with regard to sleep architecture, sleep micro-structure, and quantitative EEG power spectral endpoints. The analysis was performed on a post hoc basis using propensity score matching to compare sleep parameters separately in women and men while accounting for age group and total sleep time. RESULTS: A total of 837 EI and 239 ADI participants were included, with the majority in each population (∼65%) being women. Compared to EI, those with ADI had a lower percentage of time spent in slow wave sleep (and a corresponding higher percentage of time spent in the lighter N1 sleep), a lower number of spindles per minute of N2 sleep, and lower absolute EEG power during NREM sleep, particularly in the lower-frequency bands. Trends for lower REM sleep percentage in ADI did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings in this large data set, in which the influence of sleep problems was effectively subtracted out (since both groups had insomnia), provide strong confirmatory support of results from previous smaller studies in indicating that AD of mild-to-moderate severity is associated with less slow wave sleep, spindles, and lower-frequency EEG power. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT01097616, NCT01097629, NCT02750306.

Progression from Prodromal Alzheimer's Disease to Mild Alzheimer's Disease Dementia in the Verubecestat APECS Study: Adjudicating Diagnostic Transitions.

BACKGROUND: Delay of progression from prodromal Alzheimer's disease (AD) to dementia is an important outcome in AD trials. Centralized adjudication is intended to improve the consistency of dementia diagnosis but has not been scrutinized. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate centralized adjudication for determining progression to dementia compared with Site Investigator opinion or change in Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR). METHODS: We used data from the 2-year APECS trial of verubecestat versus placebo in 1,451 prodromal AD participants. Cases were triggered for central adjudication if: 1) the Site Investigator judged the participant had progressed to dementia, or 2) the participant's CDR sum-of-boxes score increased ≥2 points from baseline. Post-hoc analyses were performed on pooled treatment-group data to compare methods of assessing progression. RESULTS: 581/1,451 (40%) participants had changes triggering adjudication and most (83%) were confirmed as progression to dementia. Only 66% of those who met CDR criteria (regardless of whether they also met Site Investigator criteria) were adjudicated to have progressed to dementia and just 15% of those who met only CDR criteria were adjudicated to have progressed, representing 5% of progressors. In contrast, 99% of those who met Site Investigator criteria (regardless of whether they also met CDR criteria) were adjudicated to have progressed, and the same was true for those who met only Site Investigator criteria. CONCLUSION: A positive Site Investigator opinion is an excellent predictor for a positive adjudication decision regarding onset of dementia. Conversely, sole use of CDR sum-of-boxes change ≥2 is inadequate. The benefit of centralized adjudication appears doubtful.

Efficacy and tolerability of rizatriptan in pediatric migraineurs: results from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial using a novel adaptive enrichment design.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options for children and adolescents with migraine are limited. This study evaluated rizatriptan for the acute treatment of migraine in children and adolescents. METHODS: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial in migraineurs 6-17 years old with unsatisfactory response to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or acetaminophen/paracetamol. The trial included a double-blind run-in with weight-based rizatriptan dosing (5 mg for < 40 kg, 10 mg for ≥ 40 kg). In the Stage 1 run-in, patients were randomized in a ratio of 20:1 placebo:rizatriptan and were instructed to treat within 30 minutes of a moderate/severe migraine. Patients with mild/no pain after 15 minutes of treatment (responders) took no further study medication, whereas patients with moderate/severe pain (non-responders) proceeded to take study medication in Stage 2. Non-responders who received placebo in Stage 1 were randomized 1:1 to rizatriptan:placebo, whereas non-responders who received rizatriptan in Stage 1 were allocated to placebo in Stage 2. The primary efficacy endpoint was pain freedom at 2 hours after Stage 2 dose in 12-17-year-olds. RESULTS: A higher proportion of 12-17-year-olds on rizatriptan had pain freedom at 2 hours compared with those on placebo: 87/284 (30.6%) versus 63/286 (22.0%), odds ratio = 1.55 [95% CI: 1.06 to 2.26], p = 0.025. Adverse events within 14 days of dose in 12-17-year-olds were similar for rizatriptan and placebo. The pattern of findings was similar in 6-17-year-olds. CONCLUSION: Rizatriptan demonstrated a statistically significant improvement over placebo in eliminating pain and was generally well tolerated in migraineurs aged 12-17 and 6-17 years. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01001234.

Randomized, controlled study of telcagepant in patients with migraine and coronary artery disease.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of telcagepant in patients with migraine and coronary artery disease. BACKGROUND: Calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonists, such as telcagepant, may be useful for acute migraine treatment in patients with cardiovascular disease, a population for whom triptans are contraindicated. METHODS: Randomized, double-blind, two-period (6 weeks per period) crossover study in patients with stable coronary artery disease and migraine. Patients were randomized 1:1 to either: (1) Period 1: telcagepant (280-mg tablet/300-mg capsule), Period 2: acetaminophen (1000-mg); or (2) Period 1: placebo for attack 1 then acetaminophen for subsequent attacks, Period 2: telcagepant. Patients could treat up to 12 migraine attacks per period to assess the tolerability of telcagepant. The primary efficacy analysis evaluated telcagepant vs placebo on 2-hour pain freedom during the first attack of Period 1. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-five of the planned 400 patients were enrolled, and 114 took at least one dose of treatment. Telcagepant was not statistically different from placebo for 2-hour pain freedom (25.0% vs 18.9%, odds ratio = 1.62 [95% confidence interval: 0.62, 4.25]). The median number of attacks treated per period was 3. No cardiovascular thrombotic adverse events occurred within 14 days of dosing. CONCLUSION: The study was underpowered due to enrollment difficulties and did not demonstrate a significant efficacy difference between telcagepant and placebo for the treatment of a migraine attack in patients with stable coronary artery disease. Telcagepant was generally well tolerated for acute intermittent migraine treatment in these patients.

Sustained pain freedom and no adverse events as an endpoint in clinical trials of acute migraine treatments: application to patient-level data from a trial of the CGRP receptor antagonist, telcagepant, and zolmitriptan.

BACKGROUND: Endpoints used to evaluate the efficacy of acute anti-migraine drugs do not measure the tolerability. Sustained pain-free response with no adverse events has been recommended as a composite endpoint which measures the efficacy and tolerability attributes that patients desire. METHODS: The aim of this study was to evaluate new composite efficacy-plus-tolerability endpoints based on a post-hoc analysis of patient-level data from a previous randomized, placebo-controlled trial of the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist, telcagepant, and zolmitriptan in the acute treatment of migraine. Endpoints were 2-24-hour sustained pain freedom and no adverse events from 0-24 hours (SPF24NAE), 2-24 hour sustained pain relief and no adverse events from 0-24 hours (SPR24NAE), pain freedom at 2 hours and no adverse events from 0-24 hours (PF2NAE), and pain relief at 2 hours and no adverse events from 0-24 hours (PR2NAE). RESULTS: Compared with placebo, both telcagepant 300 mg and 150 mg achieved nominal superiority (p values <.05) for SPF24NAE, SPR24NAE, PF2NAE and PR2NAE. Zolmitriptan 5 mg showed nominal superiority versus placebo for SPF24NAE, SPR24NAE and PF2NAE, but not PR2NAE. Telcagepant 300 mg showed nominal superiority versus zolmitriptan for SPF24NAE, SPR24NA and PR2NAE. CONCLUSION: Composite efficacy-plus-tolerability endpoints may be useful for facilitating comparisons between treatments.