A Randomized, Double-Blind, Parallel-Group Phase III Trial Investigating the Glycemic Efficacy and Safety Profile of Fixed-Dose Combination Dapagliflozin and Linagliptin Over Linagliptin Monotherapy in Patients with Inadequately Controlled Type 2 Diabetes with Metformin.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination (FDC) of dapagliflozin (10 mg) and linagliptin (5 mg) in comparison to linagliptin 5 mg (Trajenta) in patients with insufficiently controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on metformin monotherapy. METHODS: The double-blind, randomized, multicentric, parallel-group phase III trial screened 287 adult patients with T2DM (age 18-65 years) from 16 sites across India. The recruited subjects were undergoing metformin monotherapy ≥ 1000 mg/day for at least 28 days. Patients with HbA1c of 7.5-10.5% (58-91 mmol/l) (n = 232) after 2 weeks of run-in period with linagliptin monotherapy and placebo dapagliflozin/linagliptin on metformin monotherapy were randomized (1:1) in parallel to once daily dapagliflozin/linagliptin 10/5 mg or linagliptin 5 mg for 16 weeks. Patients were stratified on the basis of HbA1c (≤ 9.0% and > 9.0%; ≤ 75 mmol/l and > 75 mmol/l)). A total of 225 subjects completed 16 weeks of treatment, 115 patients in the test group and 110 patients in the reference group. RESULTS: Dapagliflozin/linagliptin (p = 0.0003) exhibited a greater change in HbA1c from baseline than linagliptin (p < 0.0001) in 16 weeks (mean reduction, - 1.28% vs - 0.83%). Test group showed a significant decrease in fasting plasma glucose (FPG), postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) and body weight compared to the reference group. The FDC was well tolerated with adverse events being more frequent in the reference group. No serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported in the study. CONCLUSION: Dapagliflozin/linagliptin combination is a novel dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4)/sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor FDC approved in India for patients with T2DM. Potential limitations of this study are a small dose of dapagliflozin (10 mg) in the FDC, a short study duration (30 weeks) and a high minimum threshold for HbA1c (≤ 7.5%; ≤ 53 mmol/l). Results indicate the FDC to be a superior therapeutic option over linagliptin for patients with T2DM on metformin monotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CTRI/2022/08/044563; 01/08/2022.

Correction to: Efficacy and Safety of Biosimilar Romiplostim Versus Innovator Romiplostim in Patients with Chronic Immune Thrombocytopenia.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1007/s12288-022-01602-5.].

Efficacy and Safety of Biosimilar Romiplostim Versus Innovator Romiplostim in Patients with Chronic Immune Thrombocytopenia.

Romiplostim is a Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved therapy for immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). Biosimilar is a biological product that has no clinical meaningful difference from an existing FDA-approved reference product. It has a potential of lowering health-care-related cost. Biosimilar of romiplostim can be made available to patients with ITP at a low cost and can be beneficial in providing the best therapy. Thus, the efficacy and safety of biosimilar romiplostim (ENZ110) was compared with innovator romiplostim (Nplate) with respect to platelet response in patients with chronic ITP. This was a prospective, multicenter, randomized, and double-blind clinical trial. Patients with chronic ITP, aged 18-65 years, were enrolled in a study and were randomized to receive either ENZ110 or Nplate in a 3:1 ratio for a treatment period of 12 weeks, respectively. After completion of the treatment period, the patients were followed-up for one week to evaluate the platelet response and to monitor the adverse events (AEs). Over the duration of 12 weeks, platelet response of > 50 × 109/L was achieved in 85.3% patients treated with ENZ110 and in 75.0% patients treated with Nplate in per protocol population. In intent-to-treat population, 83.8% patients with ENZ110 and 76.9% patients with Nplate achieved a platelet response of > 50 × 109/L. In the ENZ110 group, 111 AEs were recorded in 66.7% patients, while 18 AEs were reported in 61.5% patients in the Nplate group. The study demonstrated non-inferiority with comparable efficacy and safety between biosimilar romiplostim and innovator romiplostim in patients with chronic ITP. Trial registration number and date of registration: CTRI/2019/04/018614.

Efficacy and Safety of Stempeucel in Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Phase 3 Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter, Placebo-Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis is a chronic, progressive, and degenerative condition with limited therapy options. Recently, biologic therapies have been an evolving option for the management of osteoarthritis. PURPOSE: To assess whether allogenic mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) have the potential to improve functional parameters and induce cartilage regeneration in patients with osteoarthritis. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: A total of 146 patients with grade 2 and 3 osteoarthritis were randomized to either an MSC group or placebo group with a ratio of 1:1. There were 73 patients per group who received either a single intra-articular injection of bone marrow-derived MSCs (BMMSCs; 25 million cells) or placebo, followed by 20 mg per 2 mL of hyaluronic acid under ultrasound guidance. The primary endpoint was the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) total score. The secondary endpoints were WOMAC subscores for pain, stiffness, and physical function; the visual analog scale score for pain; and magnetic resonance imaging findings using T2 mapping and cartilage volume. RESULTS: Overall, 65 patients from the BMMSC group and 68 patients from the placebo group completed 12-month follow-up. The BMMSC group showed significant improvements in the WOMAC total score compared with the placebo group at 6 and 12 months (percentage change: -23.64% [95% CI, -32.88 to -14.40] at 6 months and -45.60% [95% CI, -55.97 to -35.23] at 12 months P < .001; percentage change, -44.3%). BMMSCs significantly improved WOMAC pain, stiffness, and physical function subscores as well as visual analog scale scores at 6 and 12 months (P < .001). T2 mapping showed that there was no worsening of deep cartilage in the medial femorotibial compartment of the knee in the BMMSC group at 12-month follow-up, whereas in the placebo group, there was significant and gradual worsening of cartilage (P < .001). Cartilage volume did not change significantly in the BMMSC group. There were 5 adverse events that were possibly/probably related to the study drug and consisted of injection-site swelling and pain, which improved within a few days. CONCLUSION: In this small randomized trial, BMMSCs proved to be safe and effective for the treatment of grade 2 and 3 osteoarthritis. The intervention was simple and easy to administer, provided sustained relief of pain and stiffness, improved physical function, and prevented worsening of cartilage quality for ≥12 months. REGISTRATION: CTRI/2018/09/015785 (National Institutes of Health and Clinical Trials Registry-India).

Efficacy and safety of evogliptin versus sitagliptin as an add-on therapy in Indian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled with metformin: A 24-week randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority, EVOLUTION INDIA study.

AIM: This study aimed to assess efficacy and safety of evogliptin versus sitagliptin, when added to background metformin therapy in Indian patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes. METHOD: Overall, 184 patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (7% ≤ HbA1c < 10%) receiving ≥8 weeks of stable metformin monotherapy (≥1 g/day), were randomized to receive add-on treatment (evogliptin 5 mg or sitagliptin 100 mg) for 24 weeks. Primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to 12 weeks (non-inferiority margin: <0.35). RESULTS: Mean reductions in HbA1c at 12 weeks in evogliptin- and sitagliptin-treated patients were -0.37 (1.06) and -0.32 (1.14), respectively. The adjusted mean difference between treatment groups was -0.022 (95% CI: -0.374, 0.330; P = 0.901), that demonstrated non-inferiority. Reductions in FPG and PPG were similar between evogliptin and sitagliptin at 12 and 24 weeks. Changes in body weight were comparable between the treatment groups. Patients achieving target HbA1c < 7.0% (evogliptin, 26.7% vs. sitagliptin, 20%) was almost equal in both groups. Treatment-emergent adverse events occured in 52 patients (evogliptin, 25% and sitagliptin, 31.5%) and were generally mild. CONCLUSIONS: Evogliptin was non-inferior to sitagliptin in HbA1c reduction. It effectively improved glycemic control and was well tolerated in type 2 diabetes patients inadequately controlled by metformin alone.

A Multicentre, Open label, Randomized, Comparative, Parallel Group, Active-controlled, Phase III Clinical Trial to Evaluate Safety and Efficacy of Arbekacin Sulphate Injection versus Vancomycin Injection in Patients Diagnosed with MRSA Infection.

BACKGROUND: Increasing resistance to currently available antimicrobials has led to the development of new agents. Arbekacin is aminoglycoside antibiotic currently used in Japan and Korea for the treatment of infections caused by multi-resistant bacteria including MRSA. Currently there is no published data available for use of Arbekacin in Indian patient population, thus the present study was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Arbekacin in Indian population. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was a phase III, multi-centre, open-label, randomised comparative, active control study. Subjects with microbiologically confirmed MRSA infection were randomized in the study to receive either Arbekacin sulphate 200 mg OD or Vancomycin hydrochloride 1000 mg BD for a period of 7 to 14 days. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the overall cure rate i.e. Clinical and microbiological cure during the study. RESULTS: A total of 162 patients were randomized in 2 treatment groups (i.e. 81 patients in each group). Out of these microbiologically confirmed MRSA patients, 153 patients were admitted for SSTI while 9 patients were admitted for CAP. Overall cure rate of MRSA infection (clinical as well as microbiological cure) was comparable in both the treatment groups i.e. 97.5% (79/81) in Arbekacin group and 100 % (79/79) in Vancomycin group (p value: 0.159). Both Arbekacin and Vancomycin were well tolerated by the patients during the study period. CONCLUSION: Arbekacin can be considered as safe and effective alternative to vancomycin in the management of MRSA infections.