How prepared is the world? Identifying weaknesses in existing assessment frameworks for global health security through a One Health approach.

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed faults in the way we assess preparedness and response capacities for public health emergencies. Existing frameworks are limited in scope, and do not sufficiently consider complex social, economic, political, regulatory, and ecological factors. One Health, through its focus on the links among humans, animals, and ecosystems, is a valuable approach through which existing assessment frameworks can be analysed and new ways forward proposed. Although in the past few years advances have been made in assessment tools such as the International Health Regulations Joint External Evaluation, a rapid and radical increase in ambition is required. To sufficiently account for the range of complex systems in which health emergencies occur, assessments should consider how problems are defined across stakeholders and the wider sociopolitical environments in which structures and institutions operate. Current frameworks do little to consider anthropogenic factors in disease emergence or address the full array of health security hazards across the social-ecological system. A complex and interdependent set of challenges threaten human, animal, and ecosystem health, and we cannot afford to overlook important contextual factors, or the determinants of these shared threats. Health security assessment frameworks should therefore ensure that the process undertaken to prioritise and build capacity adheres to core One Health principles and that interventions and outcomes are assessed in terms of added value, trade-offs, and cobenefits across human, animal, and environmental health systems.

Fragmented health systems in COVID-19: rectifying the misalignment between global health security and universal health coverage.

The COVID-19 pandemic has placed enormous strain on countries around the world, exposing long-standing gaps in public health and exacerbating chronic inequities. Although research and analyses have attempted to draw important lessons on how to strengthen pandemic preparedness and response, few have examined the effect that fragmented governance for health has had on effectively mitigating the crisis. By assessing the ability of health systems to manage COVID-19 from the perspective of two key approaches to global health policy-global health security and universal health coverage-important lessons can be drawn for how to align varied priorities and objectives in strengthening health systems. This Health Policy paper compares three types of health systems (ie, with stronger investments in global health security, stronger investments in universal health coverage, and integrated investments in global health security and universal health coverage) in their response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and synthesises four essential recommendations (ie, integration, financing, resilience, and equity) to reimagine governance, policies, and investments for better health towards a more sustainable future.

Canagliflozin and Cardiovascular and Renal Events in Type 2 Diabetes.

Background Canagliflozin is a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor that reduces glycemia as well as blood pressure, body weight, and albuminuria in people with diabetes. We report the effects of treatment with canagliflozin on cardiovascular, renal, and safety outcomes. Methods The CANVAS Program integrated data from two trials involving a total of 10,142 participants with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk. Participants in each trial were randomly assigned to receive canagliflozin or placebo and were followed for a mean of 188.2 weeks. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Results The mean age of the participants was 63.3 years, 35.8% were women, the mean duration of diabetes was 13.5 years, and 65.6% had a history of cardiovascular disease. The rate of the primary outcome was lower with canagliflozin than with placebo (occurring in 26.9 vs. 31.5 participants per 1000 patient-years; hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75 to 0.97; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.02 for superiority). Although on the basis of the prespecified hypothesis testing sequence the renal outcomes are not viewed as statistically significant, the results showed a possible benefit of canagliflozin with respect to the progression of albuminuria (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.79) and the composite outcome of a sustained 40% reduction in the estimated glomerular filtration rate, the need for renal-replacement therapy, or death from renal causes (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.77). Adverse reactions were consistent with the previously reported risks associated with canagliflozin except for an increased risk of amputation (6.3 vs. 3.4 participants per 1000 patient-years; hazard ratio, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.41 to 2.75); amputations were primarily at the level of the toe or metatarsal. Conclusions In two trials involving patients with type 2 diabetes and an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease, patients treated with canagliflozin had a lower risk of cardiovascular events than those who received placebo but a greater risk of amputation, primarily at the level of the toe or metatarsal. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; CANVAS and CANVAS-R ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01032629 and NCT01989754 , respectively.).

Canagliflozin for Primary and Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events: Results From the CANVAS Program (Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study).

BACKGROUND: Canagliflozin is a sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor that significantly reduces the composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and elevated cardiovascular risk. The comparative effects among participants with and without a history of cardiovascular disease (secondary versus primary prevention) were prespecified for evaluation. METHODS: The CANVAS Program (Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study) randomly assigned 10 142 participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus to canagliflozin or placebo. The primary prevention cohort comprised individuals ≥50 years of age with ≥2 risk factors for cardiovascular events but with no prior cardiovascular event, and the secondary prevention cohort comprised individuals ≥30 years of age with a prior cardiovascular event. The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Secondary outcomes included heart failure hospitalization and a renal composite (40% reduction in estimated glomerular filtration rate, renal replacement therapy, or renal death). RESULTS: Primary prevention participants (N=3486; 34%) were younger (63 versus 64 years of age), were more often female (45% versus 31%), and had a longer duration of diabetes mellitus (14 versus 13 years) compared with secondary prevention participants (N=6656; 66%). The primary end point event rate was higher in the secondary prevention group compared with the primary prevention group (36.9 versus 15.7/1000 patient-years, P<0.001). In the total cohort, the primary end point was reduced with canagliflozin compared with placebo (26.9 versus 31.5/1000 patient-years; hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-0.97; P<0.001 for noninferiority, P=0.02 for superiority) with no statistical evidence of heterogeneity (interaction P value=0.18) between the primary (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.74-1.30) and secondary prevention (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72-0.95) cohorts. Renal outcomes (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.44-0.79 versus HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.39-1.02; interaction P value=0.73) and heart failure hospitalization (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.51-0.90 versus HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.35-1.15; interaction P value=0.91) were similarly reduced in the secondary and primary prevention cohorts, respectively. Lower extremity amputations were similarly increased in the secondary and primary prevention cohorts (HR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.43-3.00 versus HR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.70-3.29; interaction P value=0.63). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and prior cardiovascular events had higher rates of cardiovascular outcomes compared with the primary prevention patients. Canagliflozin reduced cardiovascular and renal outcomes with no statistical evidence of heterogeneity of the treatment effect across the primary and secondary prevention groups. Additional studies will provide further insights into the effects of canagliflozin in these patient populations. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT01032629 and NCT01989754.

Building the case for embedding global health security into universal health coverage: a proposal for a unified health system that includes public health.

In the wake of the recent west African Ebola epidemic, there is global consensus on the need for strong health systems; however, agreement is less apparent on effective mechanisms for establishing and maintaining these systems, particularly in resource-constrained settings and in the presence of multiple and sustained stresses (eg, conflict, famine, climate change, and globalisation). The construction of the International Health Regulations (2005) guidelines and the WHO health systems framework, has resulted in the separation of public health functions and health-care services, which are interdependent in actuality and must be integrated to ensure a continuous, unbroken national health system. By analysing efforts to strengthen health systems towards attaining universal health coverage and investments to improve global health security, we examine areas of overlap and offer recommendations for construction of a unified national health system that includes public health. One way towards achieving universal health coverage is to broaden the definition of a health system.

Phase 3 Studies Comparing Brodalumab with Ustekinumab in Psoriasis.

BACKGROUND: Early clinical studies suggested that the anti-interleukin-17 receptor A monoclonal antibody brodalumab has efficacy in the treatment of psoriasis. METHODS: In two phase 3 studies (AMAGINE-2 and AMAGINE-3), patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis were randomly assigned to receive brodalumab (210 mg or 140 mg every 2 weeks), ustekinumab (45 mg for patients with a body weight ≤100 kg and 90 mg for patients >100 kg), or placebo. At week 12, patients receiving brodalumab were randomly assigned again to receive a brodalumab maintenance dose of 210 mg every 2 weeks or 140 mg every 2 weeks, every 4 weeks, or every 8 weeks; patients receiving ustekinumab continued to receive ustekinumab every 12 weeks, and patients receiving placebo received 210 mg of brodalumab every 2 weeks. The primary aims were to evaluate the superiority of brodalumab over placebo at week 12 with respect to at least a 75% reduction in the psoriasis area-and-severity index score (PASI 75) and a static physician's global assessment (sPGA) score of 0 or 1 (clear or almost clear skin), as well as the superiority of brodalumab over ustekinumab at week 12 with respect to a 100% reduction in PASI score (PASI 100). RESULTS: At week 12, the PASI 75 response rates were higher with brodalumab at the 210-mg and 140-mg doses than with placebo (86% and 67%, respectively, vs. 8% [AMAGINE-2] and 85% and 69%, respectively, vs. 6% [AMAGINE-3]; P<0.001); the rates of sPGA scores of 0 or 1 were also higher with brodalumab (P<0.001). The week 12 PASI 100 response rates were significantly higher with 210 mg of brodalumab than with ustekinumab (44% vs. 22% [AMAGINE-2] and 37% vs. 19% [AMAGINE-3], P<0.001). The PASI 100 response rates with 140 mg of brodalumab were 26% in AMAGINE-2 (P=0.08 for the comparison with ustekinumab) and 27% in AMAGINE-3 (P=0.007). Rates of neutropenia were higher with brodalumab and with ustekinumab than with placebo. Mild or moderate candida infections were more frequent with brodalumab than with ustekinumab or placebo. Through week 52, the rates of serious infectious episodes were 1.0 (AMAGINE-2) and 1.3 (AMAGINE-3) per 100 patient-years of exposure to brodalumab. CONCLUSIONS: Brodalumab treatment resulted in significant clinical improvements in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis. (Funded by Amgen; AMAGINE-2 and AMAGINE-3 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01708603 and NCT01708629.).

Brodalumab, an anti-IL17RA monoclonal antibody, in psoriatic arthritis.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the efficacy and safety of brodalumab, a human monoclonal antibody against interleukin-17 receptor A (IL17RA), in a phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study involving patients with psoriatic arthritis. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with active psoriatic arthritis to receive brodalumab (140 or 280 mg subcutaneously) or placebo on day 1 and at weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10. At week 12, patients who had not discontinued their participation in the study were offered open-label brodalumab (280 mg) every 2 weeks. The primary end point was 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology response criteria (ACR 20) at week 12. RESULTS: Of the 168 patients who underwent randomization (57 in the brodalumab 140-mg group, 56 in the brodalumab 280-mg group, and 55 in the placebo group), 159 completed the double-blind phase and 134 completed 40 weeks of the open-label extension. At week 12, the brodalumab 140-mg and 280-mg groups had higher rates of ACR 20 than the placebo group (37% [P=0.03] and 39% [P=0.02], respectively, vs. 18%); they also had higher rates of 50% improvement (ACR 50) (14% [P=0.05] and 14% [P=0.05] vs. 4%). Rates of 70% improvement were not significantly higher in the brodalumab groups. Similar degrees of improvement were noted among patients who had received previous biologic therapy and those who had not received such therapy. At week 24, ACR 20 response rates in the brodalumab 140-mg and 280-mg groups were 51% and 64%, respectively, as compared with 44% among patients who switched from placebo to open-label brodalumab; responses were sustained through week 52. At week 12, serious adverse events had occurred in 3% of patients in the brodalumab groups and in 2% of those in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Brodalumab significantly improved response rates among patients with psoriatic arthritis. Larger studies of longer duration are necessary to assess adverse events. (Funded by Amgen; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01516957 .).

Optimizing the analysis strategy for the CANVAS Program: A prespecified plan for the integrated analyses of the CANVAS and CANVAS-R trials.

Two large cardiovascular outcome trials of canagliflozin, comprising the CANVAS Program, will complete in early 2017: the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) and the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study-Renal (CANVAS-R). Accruing data for the sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor class has identified questions and opportunities that were not apparent when the trials were designed. Accordingly, a series of modifications have been made to the planned analyses. These updates will ensure that the data from the CANVAS Program will maximize advances in scientific knowledge and patient care. The specification of the analysis strategy prior to knowledge of the trial results, their design by the independent scientific trial Steering Committee, the detailed a priori definition of the analysis plans, and the external review provided by the US Food and Drug Administration all provide maximally efficient and robust utilization of the data. The CANVAS Program should significantly advance our understanding of the effects of canagliflozin, and the broader SGLT2 inhibitor class, on a range of important efficacy and safety outcomes.