Efficacy and NSAID-sparing effect of secukinumab 150 mg in ankylosing spondylitis: results from phase IV ASTRUM study.

Background: Radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (r-axSpA), formerly known as ankylosing spondylitis (AS), is a chronic, inflammatory rheumatic disease associated with symptoms such as inflammatory back pain, morning stiffness, and arthritis. First-line recommendations for patients with AS include treatment with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for reducing pain and stiffness. Objectives: The objective of our study is to evaluate the efficacy and short-term NSAID-sparing effect of secukinumab in patients with AS currently treated with NSAIDs. Design: We assessed the clinical Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS20) response to secukinumab and evaluated the extent to which the use of concomitant NSAID can be reduced between weeks 4 and 12 in r-axSpA patients treated with secukinumab 150 mg compared with placebo. Methods: ASTRUM was a prospective 24-week randomized controlled trial of adult patients with active r-axSpA [Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) ⩾4] who had a documented inadequate response to ⩾2 NSAIDs. Patients were randomized (1:1:1) to initiate treatment with subcutaneous secukinumab 150 mg from either week 0 (group 1), week 4 (group 2), or week 16 (group 3). From week 4 onward, tapering of NSAIDs was allowed in all groups. Results: This study included 211 patients (n = 71, 70, and 70 in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively). ASAS20 response at week 12 for pooled groups 1 and 2 versus group 3 was 51.1% versus 44.3% (p = 0.35). A higher proportion of patients in groups 1 and 2 achieved ASAS40 and BASDAI50 and showed improvements in other secondary clinical outcomes as compared to group 3 at week 16. More patients in groups 1 and 2 versus group 3 stopped their NSAID intake from baseline through week 16. Conclusion: Treatment with secukinumab improved clinical outcomes and showed a short-term NSAID-sparing effect in patients with r-axSpA, even though the primary endpoint was not met. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT02763046, EudraCT 2015-004575-74.

Safety and efficacy of secukinumab in patients with giant cell arteritis (TitAIN): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of giant cell arteritis with glucocorticoid-sparing agents is an unmet medical need. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of secukinumab, an anti-interleukin-17A monoclonal antibody, in patients with giant cell arteritis. METHODS: We conducted a Bayesian randomised, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, phase 2 study at 11 clinics or hospitals in Germany. Patients aged 50 years or older with new-onset or relapsing giant cell arteritis who were naive to biological therapy and already receiving glucocorticoids with a prednisolone equivalent dose of 25-60 mg/day were eligible for inclusion. Participants were assigned (1:1) to receive 300 mg secukinumab or placebo subcutaneously once a week up to week 4 and every 4 weeks thereafter. In both treatment groups, prednisolone dose was tapered down to 0 mg over a 26-week period. Patients, investigator staff, and clinical trial team were masked to the treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was the median proportion (Bayesian analysis) of patients with sustained remission until week 28 in the full analysis set (ie, all patients who received at least one dose of assigned treatment, analysed according to treatment assigned at randomisation). Sustained remission rate of the placebo group from a previous trial of tocilizumab in patients with giant cell arteritis was used to derive the prior distribution of placebo sustained remission rate for the primary endpoint. The safety of secukinumab was assessed in the safety set (ie, all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment, analysed according to study treatment received). This trial is completed and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03765788. FINDINGS: Of the 65 patients who were assessed for eligibility, 52 patients (median age 75 years [IQR 69-79]; 35 [67%] female and 17 [33%] male, 52 [100%] White) were enrolled between Jan 30, 2019 and March 30, 2020 and were randomly assigned to receive secukinumab (n=27) or placebo (n=25). Four of 27 patients in the secukinumab group and eight of 25 patients in the placebo group discontinued treatment by week 28 of the study. On the basis of the Bayesian analysis, the median proportion of patients in sustained remission until week 28 was 70% (95% credibility interval 52-85) in the secukinumab group versus 20% (12-30) in the placebo group. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the secukinumab (27 [100%] of 27 patients had any adverse event) and placebo groups (24 [96%] of 25 patients had any adverse event); the most common adverse events were hypertension (six [22%] of 27 patients in the secukinumab group and eight [32%] of 25 patients in the placebo group) and nasopharyngitis (five [19%] of 27 patients in the secukinumab group and five [20%] of 25 patients in the placebo group). Two patients (one in each group) died during the study, neither of which was considered to be related to study treatment. INTERPRETATION: Patients with active giant cell arteritis had a higher sustained remission rate in the secukinumab group than in the placebo group at week 28, in combination with glucocorticoid taper regimen. Secukinumab was tolerated well with no new safety concerns. This proof-of-concept phase 2 study further supports the development of secukinumab as a treatment option for people with giant cell arteritis. FUNDING: Novartis Pharma.

Erenumab versus topiramate: post hoc efficacy analysis from the HER-MES study.

OBJECTIVE: HER-MES was the first head-to-head, phase 4 trial to assess the tolerability and effectiveness of erenumab against standard of care treatment (topiramate). This post hoc analysis compared the efficacy of erenumab with topiramate in patients who completed the trial on study medication. METHODS: Post hoc sensitivity analysis was performed using the full analysis set. Outcomes assessed included the proportion of patients with a ≥50% reduction in monthly migraine days (MMD) from baseline (50% responder rate), over the last 3 months (months 4, 5, and 6) of the double-blind treatment phase (DBTP), the 50% responder rate during the first month of the DBTP, and change from baseline in MMD during the DBTP. Multiple imputation was done for efficacy values of patients who discontinued study treatment. RESULTS: Patients (N = 777) were randomly assigned (1:1) to either 70 or 140 mg/month erenumab (N = 389) or 50-100 mg/day topiramate (N = 388). Of these, 334 patients (85.9%) receiving erenumab, and 231 patients (59.5%) receiving topiramate completed the DBTP on study medication. Patients on study medication until the end of the DBTP received a mean dose of 119 mg/month for erenumab and 92 mg/day for topiramate. At month 1, a significantly greater proportion of patients receiving erenumab (39.2%) reported ≥50% reduction in MMD from baseline compared with those receiving topiramate (24.0%; p < 0.001). In the last 3 months, a significantly larger proportion of patients receiving erenumab (60.3%) achieved ≥50% reduction in MMD from baseline compared with those receiving topiramate (43.3%; p < 0.001). Patients receiving erenumab demonstrated significantly greater reductions in MMD during the last 3 months from baseline versus those receiving topiramate (- 6.13 vs - 4.90; 95% CI: - 1.87 to - 0.61; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This post hoc analysis demonstrated significantly superior efficacy of erenumab versus topiramate in achieving a ≥50% reduction in MMD with an early onset of efficacy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03828539 .

Erenumab versus topiramate for the prevention of migraine - a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled phase 4 trial.

BACKGROUND: We compared the tolerability and efficacy of erenumab, a monoclonal antibody binding to the calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor, to topiramate for migraine prophylaxis in adults. METHODS: HER-MES was a 24-week, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, controlled trial conducted in 82 sites in Germany. Patients with ≥4 migraine days per month and naïve to study drugs were randomly assigned (1:1) to either subcutaneous erenumab (70 or 140 mg/month) plus topiramate placebo (erenumab group) or oral topiramate at the individual dose with optimal efficacy (50-100 mg/day) plus erenumab placebo (topiramate group).The primary endpoint was medication discontinuation due to an adverse event during the double-blind phase. The proportion of patients that achieved ≥50% reduction from baseline in monthly migraine days during the last 3 months of the double-blind phase was a secondary endpoint. RESULTS: Seven hundred and seventy-seven patients were randomised (from 22 February 2019 to 29 July, 2020) and 95.1% completed the study. In the erenumab group, 10.6% discontinued medication due to adverse events compared to 38.9% in the topiramate group (odds ratio, 0.19; 95% confidence interval 0.13-0.27; p < 0.001). Significantly more patients achieved a ≥50% reduction in monthly migraine days from baseline with erenumab (55.4% vs. 31.2%; odds ratio 2.76; 95% confidence interval 2.06-3.71; p < 0.001). No new safety signals occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Erenumab demonstrated a favourable tolerability and efficacy profile compared to topiramate.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03828539, URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03828539.

A randomized clinical trial on the short-term effects of 12-week sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril on peak oxygen consumption in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: results from the ACTIVITY-HF study.

AIMS: ACTIVITY-HF was a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled study, which assessed the short-term effect of sacubitril/valsartan compared with the active comparator enalapril on improving maximal exercise capacity in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 201 ambulatory patients with HFrEF (left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 40%, New York Heart Association class III) across 34 centres in Germany were randomized (1:1) to receive sacubitril/valsartan 97/103 mg bid (n = 103) or enalapril 10 mg bid (n = 98). The primary endpoint of the study was the change from baseline in peak oxygen consumption (VO2 ; adjusted to body weight) after 12 weeks, and the key secondary endpoint was change from baseline in peak VO2 after 6 weeks. The study population was predominantly male (81.1%) with a mean age of 66.9 years and a body mass index of 29.4 kg/m2 . Change in peak VO2 from baseline to Week 12 was similar between sacubitril/valsartan and enalapril groups [least squares mean difference: 0.32 mL/min/kg; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.21, 0.85; P = 0.2327]. Similarly, no significant differences were observed between the two treatment groups in minute ventilation to carbon dioxide production slope, exercise capacity at first ventilatory threshold or Borg scale at either Week 6 or Week 12. Change in heart rate at first ventilatory threshold was lower in the sacubitril/valsartan group compared with the enalapril group at Week 12 (mean -3.75 bpm; 95% CI -7.03, -0.48; P = 0.0248). The safety of sacubitril/valsartan was comparable to enalapril. CONCLUSION: In patients with HFrEF, short-term treatment with sacubitril/valsartan for 12 weeks did not result in significant benefits on peak VO2 when compared with enalapril.

Efficacy and safety of secukinumab in patients with giant cell arteritis: study protocol for a randomized, parallel group, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: One key pathological finding in giant cell arteritis (GCA) is the presence of interferon-gamma and interleukin (IL)-17 producing T helper (Th) 1 and Th17 cells in affected arteries. There is anecdotal evidence of successful induction and maintenance of remission with the monoclonal anti-IL-17A antibody secukinumab. Inhibition of IL-17A could therefore represent a potential new therapeutic option for the treatment of GCA. METHODS: This is a randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center, phase II study in which patients, treating physicians, and the associated clinical staff as well as the sponsor clinical team are blinded. It is designed to evaluate efficacy and safety of secukinumab compared to placebo in combination with an open-label prednisolone taper regimen. Patients included are naïve to biological therapy and have newly diagnosed or relapsing GCA. Fifty patients are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either 300 mg secukinumab or placebo subcutaneously at baseline, weeks 1, 2 and 3, and every 4 weeks from week 4. Patients in both treatment arms receive a 26-week prednisolone taper regimen. The study consists of a maximum 6-week screening period, a 52-week treatment period (including the 26-week tapering), and an 8-week safety follow-up, with primary and secondary endpoint assessments at week 28. Patients who do not achieve remission by week 12 experience a flare after remission or cannot adhere to the prednisolone tapering will enter the escape arm and receive prednisolone at a dose determined by the investigator's clinical judgment. The blinded treatment is continued. Two optional imaging sub-studies are included (ultrasound and contrast-media enhanced magnetic resonance angiography [MRA]) to assess vessel wall inflammation and occlusion before and after treatment. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients in sustained remission until week 28 in the secukinumab group compared to the proportion of patients in the placebo group. A Bayesian approach is applied. DISCUSSION: The trial design allows the first placebo-controlled data collection on the efficacy and safety of secukinumab in patients with GCA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03765788 . Registration on 5 December 2018, prospective registration, EudraCT number 2018-002610-12; clinical trial protocol number CAIN457ADE11C.

An 8 week open-label interventional multicenter study to explore the lung clearance index as endpoint for clinical trials in cystic fibrosis patients ≥8 years of age, chronically infected with Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

BACKGROUND: Forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) is the only parameter currently recognized as a surrogate endpoint in cystic fibrosis (CF) trials. However, FEV1 is relatively insensitive to changes in the small airways of patients with milder lung disease. This pilot study aimed to explore the lung clearance index (LCI) as a marker for use in efficacy trials with inhaled antibiotics in CF. METHODS: This open-label, single-arm study enrolled CF patients with Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection, who were treated with tobramycin (28-day on/off regime). FEV1, LCI and bacterial load in sputum (CFU) were assessed at baseline, after 1, 4 and 8 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: All patients (n = 17) showed elevated LCI of > 11 despite 3 patients having normal FEV1 (> 90% predicted) at baseline. Overall, LCI improved in 8 (47%) patients and FEV1 in 9 (53%) patients. At week 4, LCI improved by 0.88, FEV1 increased by 0.52%, and P. aeruginosa reduced by 30,481.3 CFU/mL. These changes were however statistically non-significant. Six adverse events occurred in 5/17 (29.4%) patients, most of which were mild-to-moderate in severity. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the low evaluable sample size, no specific trend was observed related to the changes between LCI, FEV1 and CFU. Based on the individual data from this study and from recently published literature, LCI has been shown to be a more sensitive parameter than FEV1 for lung function. LCI can be hypothesized to be an appropriate endpoint for efficacy trials in CF patients if the heterogeneity in lung function is limited by enrolling younger patients or patients with more milder lung disease and thus, limiting the ventilation inhomogeneities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT02248922.

Quality of Life in Psoriasis Vulgaris: Use of the ItchyQoL Question-naire in a Secukinumab Phase III Trial in Patients with Psoriasis Vulgaris.

Chronic pruritus is a bothersome symptom in psoriasis vulgaris and can profoundly reduce quality of life (QoL). In this exploratory analysis of the PSORITUS study, the impact of pruritus on QoL in 130 subjects with moderate-to-severe psoriasis was assessed using the ItchyQoL questionnaire. The majority of patients (n = 127) had to scratch their itchy skin regularly, which led to painful skin and frustration (mean ± standard deviation; SD ItchyQoL scores; 4.50 ± 0.56; 3.80 ± 1.09 and 4.20 ± 0.87, respectively). Changes in either temperature or season led to a worsening of itching in most of the patients (n = 126; mean ± SD ItchyQoL score; 3.80 ± 1.02). Many patients felt ashamed (n = 125) or embarrassed (n = 127) due to their itchy skin (mean ± SD ItchyQoL scores; 3.90 ± 1.26 and 3.40 ± 1.19, respectively). The results demonstrated the ItchyQoL questionnaire as a validated tool responsive to treatment for detailed insights into chronic pruritus in patients with psoriasis.

Comparing everolimus-based immunosuppression with reduction or withdrawal of calcineurin inhibitor reduction from six months after heart transplantation: the randomized MANDELA study.

In the 12-month, open-label MANDELA study, patients were randomized at month 6 after heart transplantation to (i) convert to calcineurin inhibitor (CNI)-free immunosuppression with everolimus (EVR), mycophenolic acid and steroids (CNI-free, n=71), or to (ii) continue reduced-exposure CNI, with EVR and steroids (EVR/redCNI, n=74). Tacrolimus was administered in 48.8% of EVR/redCNI patients and 52.6% of CNI-free patients at radomization. Both strategies improved and stabilized renal function based on the primary endpoint (estimated GFR at month 18 post-transplant post-randomization) with superiority of the CNI-free group versus EVR/redCNI : mean 64.1mL/min/1.73m2 versus 52.9mL/min/1.73m2 ; difference +11.3mL/min/1.73m2 (p<0.001). By month 18, estimated GFR had increased by ≥10mL/min/1.732 in 31.8% and 55.2% of EVR/redCNI and CNI-free patients, respectively, and by ≥25 mL/min/1.73m2 in 4.5% and 20.9%. Rates of biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) were 6.8% and 21.1%; all cases were without hemodynamic compromise. BPAR was less frequent with EVR/redCNI versus the CNI-free regimen (p=0.015); 6/15 episodes in CNI-free patients occurred with EVR concentration <5ng/mL. Rates of adverse events and associated discontinuations were comparable EVR/redCNI from month 6 achieved stable renal function with infrequent BPAR. One-year renal function can be improved by early conversion to EVR-based CNI-free therapy but requires close EVR monitoring. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Secukinumab for moderate-to-severe palmoplantar pustular psoriasis: Results of the 2PRECISE study.

BACKGROUND: Palmoplantar pustular psoriasis (PPP) is a debilitating disease of the palms and/or soles that is resistant to treatment. Secukinumab, an anti-interleukin 17A monoclonal antibody, is highly efficacious in the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to determine the rate of achievement of a 75% improvement from baseline in Palmoplantar Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PPPASI75) with secukinumab at week 16 versus with placebo (at a 2.5% significance level). METHODS: 2PRECISE was a phase 3b multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study comparing treatment with 300 mg of secukinumab (n = 79), 150 mg of secukinumab (n = 80), and placebo (n = 78) in subjects with moderate-to-severe PPP over a period of 52 weeks. RESULTS: The primary end point was not met. At week 16, 26.6% of subjects treated with 300 mg of secukinumab achieved PPPASI75 versus 14.1% of those who received placebo (P = .0411) (odds ratio, 2.62; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-6.60). At week 52, 41.8% of subjects treated with 300 mg of secukinumab had achieved ppPASI75. More Dermatology Life Quality Index responses of 0 or 1 were achieved with 300 mg of secukinumab (13.0%) than with placebo (4.3%) at week 16. At week 52, 43.1% of subjects receiving 300 mg of secukinumab had a Dermatology Life Quality Index response of 0 or 1. No unexpected adverse events were observed. LIMITATIONS: Small sample size and characteristics of the PPP disease course. CONCLUSION: Patients with PPP who were treated with secukinumab, 300 mg, showed benefit in terms of PPPASI75 responses over 52 weeks and improved quality of life.

Impact of Secukinumab on Endothelial Dysfunction and Other Cardiovascular Disease Parameters in Psoriasis Patients over 52 Weeks.

Psoriasis increases the risk of cardiovascular (CV) disease. Secukinumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody against IL-17A, shows significant efficacy in psoriasis, but effects on CV markers are unknown. CARIMA (Evaluation of Cardiovascular Risk Markers in Psoriasis Patients Treated with Secukinumab) was a 52-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, exploratory trial in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis without clinical CV disease. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 300 mg or 150 mg secukinumab until week 52 or to receive placebo until week 12 and then 300 mg or 150 mg secukinumab until week 52. The primary outcome was endothelial function measured by flow-mediated dilation (FMD). Baseline FMD was significantly lower in psoriasis patients than healthy volunteers (4.4 ± 3.9% vs. 6.1 ± 3.3%, P = 0.01). At week 12, baseline-adjusted mean FMD was numerically higher in patients receiving secukinumab versus those receiving placebo, but this difference (300-mg group, +1.2%; 150-mg group, +0.76%; P = 0.223 and P = 0.403 by analysis of covariance) did not reach significance. At week 52, FMD increased across groups. FMD was significantly higher than baseline in patients receiving the label dose of 300 mg secukinumab for 52 weeks (+2.1%, 95% confidence interval = 0.8-3.3; P = 0.0022). Other relevant CV markers were unchanged. CARIMA indicates that secukinumab might have a beneficial effect on CV risk by improving the endothelial function of patients with plaque psoriasis.

Pharmacokinetics and Clinical Outcomes of Generic Tacrolimus (Hexal) Versus Branded Tacrolimus in De Novo Kidney Transplant Patients: A Multicenter, Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Scrupulous comparison of the pharmacokinetic and clinical characteristics of generic tacrolimus formulations versus the reference drug (Prograf) is essential. The pharmacokinetics of the Tacrolimus Hexal (TacHexal) formulation is similar to Prograf in stable renal transplant patients, but data in de novo patients are lacking. METHODS: De novo kidney transplant patients were randomized to generic tacrolimus (TacHexal) or Prograf in a 6-month open-label study. RESULTS: The primary end point, the dose-normalized area under the curve0-12h at month 1 posttransplant, was similar with TacHexal or Prograf; back-transformed geometric means of adjusted log-transformed values (analysis of variance) were 18.99 ng·h·L (TacHexal) and 20.48 ng·h·L (Prograf) (ratio, 1.08; 90% confidence interval, 0.84-1.38; P = 0.605). The dose-normalized peak concentration geometric means at month 1 was also comparable between treatments (ratio, 1.16; 90% confidence interval, 0.88-1.54; P = 0.377). There were no relevant differences in other pharmacokinetic parameters at month 1 or in area under the curve0-4h and trough concentration when measured at months 3 and 6. The adjusted change in mean estimated glomerular filtration rate from baseline to month 6 (Nankivell) was noninferior for TacHexal versus Prograf using observed values (47.7 vs 38.6 mL/min per 1.73 m, P < 0.001) and was superior based on observed values (P = 0.044) but not using last observation-carried forward method. Rates of biopsy-proven acute rejection (5.7% vs 7.9%), adverse events, and serious adverse events were similar with TacHexal or Prograf. CONCLUSION: Tacrolimus pharmacokinetics is similar with TacHexal and Prograf early after kidney transplantation. Efficacy and safety in this limited data set were comparable, with at least equivalent graft function under TacHexal.

Efficacy and safety of once-daily QVA149 compared with the free combination of once-daily tiotropium plus twice-daily formoterol in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD (QUANTIFY): a randomised, non-inferiority study.

BACKGROUND: QVA149 is a once-daily (o.d.) inhaled dual bronchodilator containing a fixed-dose combination of the long-acting ß2-agonist indacaterol and the long-acting muscarinic antagonist glycopyrronium for the treatment of COPD. The QUANTIFY study compared QVA149 with a free-dose bronchodilator combination of tiotropium plus formoterol (TIO+FOR) in improving health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients with COPD. METHODS: This multicentre, blinded, triple-dummy, parallel-group, non-inferiority study randomised patients aged ≥40 years with moderate-to-severe COPD (post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) ≥30% to <80% predicted) to QVA149 110/50 µg o.d. or TIO 18 µg o.d.+ FOR 12 µg twice daily (1:1) for 26 weeks. The primary endpoint was to demonstrate non-inferiority in HRQoL assessed using St George's Respiratory Questionnaire-COPD (SGRQ-C). The prespecified non-inferiority margin was 4 units. Secondary endpoints included Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI) score, pre-dose FEV1, forced vital capacity (FVC) and safety. RESULTS: Of the 934 patients randomised (QVA149=476 and TIO+FOR=458), 87.9% completed the study. At week 26, non-inferiority was met for SGRQ-C (QVA149 vs TIO+FOR; difference: -0.69 units; 95% CI -2.31 to 0.92; p=0.399). A significantly higher percentage of patients achieved a clinically relevant ≥1 point improvement in TDI total score with QVA149 (49.6%) versus TIO+FOR (42.4%; p=0.033). QVA149 significantly increased pre-dose FEV1 (+68 mL, 95% CI 37 mL to 100 mL; p<0.001) and FVC (+74 mL, 95% CI 24 mL to 125 mL; p=0.004) compared with TIO+FOR at week 26. The incidence of adverse events was comparable between both treatments (QVA149=43.7% and TIO+FOR=42.6%). CONCLUSIONS: QVA149 is non-inferior to TIO+FOR in improving HRQoL, with clinically meaningful and significant improvements in breathlessness and lung function in patients with COPD. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01120717.

Renal function to 5 years after late conversion of kidney transplant patients to everolimus: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Few trials have investigated late preemptive conversion of kidney transplant patients from a calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) to an mTOR inhibitor. METHODS: In an open-label, 12-month, prospective, randomized, parallel-group study, maintenance kidney transplant patients (>6 months post-transplant) either switched from CNI to everolimus or continued their current CNI regimen. Patients who completed the core study were followed to 5 years post-randomization. RESULTS: Of 93 randomized patients, 78 completed the core study and 67 attended the final 60-month study visit. Mean time post-transplant at baseline was 82.6 months and 70.5 months in the everolimus and CNI groups, respectively. At month 60, adjusted mean eGFR (Nankivell) was 63.0 (95% CI 57.8, 68.2) mL/min/1.73 m(2) in the everolimus group versus 57.9 (95% CI 52.6, 63.1) mL/min/1.73 m(2) in the CNI group, a difference of 5.1 (95% CI -0.6, 10.8) mL/min/1.73 m(2) (p = 0.076). Among patients who remained on randomized study drug at month 60, mean eGFR (Nankivell) was 71.6 (95% CI 64.2, 79.0) mL/min/1.73 m(2) in everolimus-treated patients (n = 21) versus 60.6 (95% CI 55.1, 66.1) mL/min/1.73 m(2) in CNI-treated patients (n = 29) (mean difference 11.0; 95% CI 3.6, 18.5 mL/min/1.73 m(2); p = 0.005). No cases of BPAR occurred from randomization to month 60 in either group. Graft loss occurred in three everolimus-treated patients and one CNI-treated patient. No unexpected safety concerns were observed in either group. CONCLUSION: Late preemptive conversion of maintenance kidney transplant patients from CNI to everolimus may be associated with improved long-term renal function and preserves immunosuppressive efficacy. Patient numbers were low, but these findings merit further investigation.

Aliskiren/amlodipine as a single-pill combination in hypertensive patients: subgroup analysis of elderly patients, with metabolic risk factors or high body mass index.

AIMS: Blood pressure (BP) reduction in hypertensive patients is more difficult to achieve in the elderly or in the presence of comorbidities. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of the single-pill combination (SPC) aliskiren/amlodipine in hypertensive elderly patients, patients with high body mass index (BMI), with at least one metabolic risk factor, and/or type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM). METHODS: In an open-label non-randomized study, patients not adequately controlled by previous treatment with the SPC olmesarten 40/amlodipine 10 (phase 1) were switched to the SPC aliskiren 300/amlodipine 10 (phase 2). The present post-hoc analysis investigated BP reduction in phase 2 in the named subgroups. The EudraCT identifier was 2009-016693-33, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01113047. RESULTS: Of the 187 patients not adequately controlled in phase 1 and thus treated with the SPC aliskiren 300/amlodipine 10 in phase 2, 69 were of advanced age (≥65 years), 74 or 89 were overweight or obese (BMI 25.0-29.9 kg/m(2) or ≥30 kg/m(2), respectively), 91 had metabolic risk factors (without DM) and 41 had DM. At the beginning of phase 2, depending on the subgroup, baseline SBP was 168-169 mmHg and DBP 103-104 mmHg. After 4 weeks of treatment with aliskiren 300/amlodipine 10, SBP/DBP was lowered by -5.1/-4.8 mmHg in the total cohort, by -5.5/-5.1 mmHg in elderly patients, by -6.7/-5.5 in overweight and by -4.2/-4.5 mmHg in obese patients, by -6.4/-4.7 mmHg in patients with metabolic risk factors without DM, and by -3.3/-5.0 mmHg in DM patients. Limitations include low sample size, limited treatment duration and the fact that the post-hoc defined groups were not mutually exclusive. CONCLUSIONS: In this study reflecting clinical practice, the aliskiren/amlodipine combination achieved effective BP reduction in elderly patients or with metabolic comorbidities, including DM that might be more difficult to treat. This consistent BP lowering pattern facilitates everyday care of patients who receive aliskiren/amlodipine.

A multi-center, prospective, open-label, 8-week study of certoparin for anticoagulation during maintenance hemodialysis--the membrane study.

BACKGROUND: Adequate anticoagulation is prerequisite for effective hemodialysis to prevent clotting in the extracorporeal circuit. We aimed providing first data on the efficacy and safety of the low-molecular-weight heparin certoparin in this setting. METHODS: Multicenter, open-label, 8-week trial. Patients received a single dose of 3,000 IU certoparin i.v. with additional titration steps of 600 IU and/or continuous infusion if necessary. RESULTS: 120 patients were screened, 109 enrolled (median age 71; range 26-90 years) and 106 available for efficacy analyses. The percentage of unsatisfactory dialysis results at 8 weeks due to clotting or bleeding, was 1.9% (n = 2/106; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23-6.65%); no major bleeding. 1.9% had moderate/severe clotting in the lines/bubble catcher and 2.8% in the dialyser at week 8. 15.7 ± 14.3% of the dialysis filters' visual surface area was showing redness. In subgroups of patients receiving median doses of 3000 ± 0, 3000 (2400-6000) and 4200 (3000-6600) IU, plasma aXa levels at baseline, 4 and 8 weeks were 0.24 [95%CI 0.21-0.27], 0.33 [0.27-0.40] and 0.38 [0.33-0.45] aXa IU/ml at 2 h. C48h was 0.01 [0.01-0.02] aXa IU at all visits. At baseline and 4 weeks AUC0-48h was 2.66 [2.19-3.24] and 3.66 [3.00-4.45] aXa IU*h/ml. In 3.0% of dialyses (n = 83/2724) prolonged fistula compression times were documented. Eight patients (7.34%) had at least one episode of minor bleeding. 4) 85.3% of patients had any adverse event, 9.2% were serious without suspected drug relation; and in 32 patients a drug-relation was suspected. CONCLUSIONS: Certoparin appears effective and safe for anticoagulation in patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis.

Efficacy and tolerability of the single-pill combination of aliskiren 300 mg/amlodipine 10 mg in hypertensive patients not controlled by olmesartan 40 mg/amlodipine 10 mg.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate whether the single pill combination (SPC) of aliskiren 300 mg and amlodipine 10 mg (ALIS 300/AMLO 10) improves blood pressure (BP) reduction in hypertensive patients not adequately controlled by the SPC olmesartan 40 mg and amlodipine 10 mg (OLM 40/AMLO 10). METHODS: Open-label, non-randomized single-arm study. Patients with stage 2 hypertension were titrated to the SPC OLM 40/AMLO 10 (4-week Phase 1). If hypertension was not controlled they were switched to the SPC ALIS 300/AMLO 10 (4-week Phase 2). In the optional 4-week study extension hydrochlorothiazide (HCT) 12.5 mg was added. EudraCT 2009-016693-33. RESULTS: In the 342 patients treated, OLM 40/AMLO 10 reduced systolic BP (SBP)/diastolic BP (DBP) by 24.5/14.5 mmHg by end of Phase 1. Those 187 patients with uncontrolled hypertension at the end of Phase 1 switched to ALIS 300/AMLO 10 experienced a further SBP reduction of 5.1 mmHg (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.7 to 6.5, p < 0.0001) and a DBP reduction of 4.8 mmHg (95% CI 3.8 to 5.8; p < 0.0001) in Phase 2. DBP or SBP responder rates were achieved by 51.3% or 44.4%, respectively, SBP and DBP normalization by 36.4%. In 65 patients whose BP was not controlled in Phase 2, SPC ALIS 300/AMLO 10/HCT 12.5 mg decreased SBP/DBP by further 8.1/6.7 mmHg (p < 0.0001 each). No deaths or serious adverse events were noted. Significant adverse events leading to study discontinuation were reported in 2.6% (Phase 1), 2.7% (Phase 2), and 0% (extension). Limitations included the open-label, single-arm non-randomized design, and the relatively short duration. CONCLUSIONS: In this switch study reflecting clinical practice, patients with moderate hypertension not controlled by the SPC OLM 40/AMLO 10 achieved a clinically and statistically significant reduction of blood pressure from the SPC ALIS 300/AMLO 10 and the optional addition of HCT. All drug combinations were well tolerated.

Effects of the combinations of amlodipine/valsartan versus losartan/hydrochlorothiazide on left ventricular hypertrophy as determined with magnetic resonance imaging in patients with hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), a marker of cardiac end-organ damage, is frequently found in patients with arterial hypertension and is associated with cardiovascular and cerebrovascular morbidity and mortality. Therefore, LVH regression is an important treatment goal. For amlodipine plus valsartan (A/V) no specific study on LVH has been reported to date. METHODS: Prospective, open-label, randomized parallel-group study. Patients with essential hypertension and LVH were randomized to 52-week treatment with A/V 10/160 mg (n = 43) or the active comparator losartan/HCT 100/25 mg (L/H, n = 47). Add-on medication was allowed in case of inadequate blood pressure control. LV parameters were measured by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and adjudicated in a blinded manner. Study identifiers were NCT00446563 and EudraCT 2006-001977-17. RESULTS: In addition to the study treatment, 35% of patients in the A/V group and 49% in the L/H group received additional antihypertensive medication. Compared to baseline, both treatments reduced measures of LVH significantly after 52 weeks (e.g. LV mass index in the A/V group from 64.7 g/m(2) by -3.5 g/m(2), in the L/H group from 69.1 g/m(2) by -4.4 g/m(2), p < 0.01 for both). LV ejection fraction and LV volumes were not significantly changed by any regimen. A/V and L/H treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Both regimen were effective in reducing LV mass compared to baseline and were well tolerated.

Heparin based prophylaxis to prevent venous thromboembolic events and death in patients with cancer - a subgroup analysis of CERTIFY.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer have an increased risk of VTE. We compared VTE rates and bleeding complications in 1) cancer patients receiving LMWH or UFH and 2) patients with or without cancer. METHODS: Acutely-ill, non-surgical patients ≥ 70 years with (n = 274) or without cancer (n = 2,965) received certoparin 3,000 UaXa o.d. or UFH 5,000 IU t.i.d. for 8-20 days. RESULTS: 1) Thromboembolic events in cancer patients (proximal DVT, symptomatic non-fatal PE and VTE-related death) occurred at 4.50% with certoparin and 6.03% with UFH (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.23-2.39). Major bleeding was comparable and minor bleedings (0.75 vs. 5.67%) were nominally less frequent. 7.5% of certoparin and 12.8% of UFH treated patients experienced serious adverse events. 2) Thromboembolic event rates were comparable in patients with or without cancer (5.29 vs. 4.13%) as were bleeding complications. All cause death was increased in cancer (OR 2.68; 95%CI 1.22-5.86). 10.2% of patients with and 5.81% of those without cancer experienced serious adverse events (OR 1.85; 95% CI 1.21-2.81). CONCLUSIONS: Certoparin 3,000 UaXa o.d. and 5,000 IU UFH t.i.d. were equally effective and safe with respect to bleeding complications in patients with cancer. There were no statistically significant differences in the risk of thromboembolic events in patients with or without cancer receiving adequate anticoagulation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00451412.