Neuroimaging abnormalities associated with immunotherapy responsiveness in Down syndrome regression disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of neuroimaging abnormalities in individuals with Down syndrome regression disorder (DSRD) and evaluate if neuroimaging abnormalities were predictive of therapeutic responses. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective, case-control study which reviewed neuroimaging studies of individuals with DSRD and compared them to a control cohort of individuals with Down syndrome (DS) alone was performed. Individuals aged 10-30 years and meeting international consensus criteria for DSRD were included. The presence of T1, T2/FLAIR, and SWI signal abnormalities was reviewed. Response rates to various therapies, including immunotherapy, were evaluated in the presence of neuroimaging abnormalities. RESULTS: In total, 74 individuals (35%) had either T2/FLAIR and/or SWI signal abnormality compared to 14 individuals (12%) without DSRD (p < 0.001, 95%CI: 2.18-7.63). T2/FLAIR signal abnormalities were not appreciated more frequently in individuals with DSRD (14%, 30/210) than in the control cohort (9%, 11/119) (p = 0.18, OR: 1.63, 95%CI: 0.79-3.40). SWI signal abnormalities were appreciated at a higher frequency in individuals with DSRD (24%, 51/210) compared to the control cohort (4%, 5/119) (p < 0.001, OR: 7.31, 95%CI: 2.83-18.90). T2/FLAIR signal abnormalities were localized to the frontal (40%, 12/30) and parietal lobes (37%, 11/30). SWI signal abnormalities were predominantly in the bilateral basal ganglia (94%, 49/52). Individuals with DSRD and the presence of T2/FLAIR and/or SWI signal abnormalities were much more likely to respond to immunotherapy (p < 0.001, OR: 8.42. 95%CI: 3.78-18.76) and less likely to respond to benzodiazepines (p = 0.01, OR: 0.45, 95%CI: 0.25-0.83), antipsychotics (p < 0.001, OR: 0.28, 95%CI: 0.11-0.55), or electroconvulsive therapy (p < 0.001, OR: 0.12; 95%CI: 0.02-0.78) compared to individuals without these neuroimaging abnormalities. INTERPRETATION: This study indicates that in individuals diagnosed with DSRD, T2/FLAIR, and SWI signal abnormalities are more common than previously thought and predict response to immunotherapy.

Fezolinetant for treatment of moderate-to-severe vasomotor symptoms associated with menopause (SKYLIGHT 1): a phase 3 randomised controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Neurokinin 3 receptor antagonists are potential non-hormonal therapies for the treatment of vasomotor symptoms in menopausal women as options are scarce for those who cannot or do not want to take hormone therapy. Fezolinetant is one of the first non-hormonal neurokinin 3 receptor antagonists in development for the treatment of vasomotor symptoms due to menopause. This study investigated the safety and efficacy of fezolinetant for the treatment of moderate-to-severe vasomotor symptoms associated with menopause. METHODS: SKYLIGHT 1 is a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 12-week, phase 3 trial with a 40-week active treatment extension. This trial was done at 97 facilities across the USA, Canada, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Spain, and the UK. Women aged 40-65 years with an average of seven or more moderate-to-severe hot flashes per day were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to once-daily exact-matched placebo, fezolinetant 30 mg, or fezolinetant 45 mg. Randomisation was done using a web-based interactive response system and investigators, project team members, clinical staff, and participants were masked to treatment assignment. Coprimary endpoints were mean change in frequency and severity of vasomotor symptoms from baseline to weeks 4 and 12. The efficacy and safety analyses comprised all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04003155) and is completed. FINDINGS: Between July 11, 2019, and Aug 11, 2021, 2205 women were recruited of whom 175 were assigned to placebo, 176 to fezolinetant 30 mg, and 176 to fezolinetant 45 mg (175 in the placebo group, 174 in the fezolinetant 30 mg group, and 173 in the fezolinetant 45 mg received at least one dose [safety analysis set]). One participant randomly assigned to fezolinetant 45 mg received fezolinetant 30 mg in error, so the efficacy analysis set (full analysis set) consisted of 173 in the fezolinetant 30 mg group and 174 in the fezolinetant 45 mg group. 23 participants in the placebo group, 31 in the fezolinetant 30 mg group, and 13 in the fezolinetant 45 mg group discontinued treatment before week 12, mostly due to adverse events or participant withdrawal. Compared with placebo, fezolinetant 30 mg and fezolinetant 45 mg significantly reduced the frequency of vasomotor symptoms at week 4 (difference in change in least squares mean -1·87 [SE 0·42; p<0·001], -2·07 [SE 0·42; p<0·001]) and week 12 (-2·39 [SE 0·44; p<0·001], -2·55 [SE 0·43; p<0·001]). Compared with placebo, fezolinetant 30 mg and 45 mg significantly reduced the severity of vasomotor symptoms at week 4 (-0·15 [0·06; p=0·012], -0·19 [0·06; p=0·002]) and week 12 (-0·24 [0·08; p=0·002], -0·20 [0·08; p=0·007]). Improvements in frequency and severity of vasomotor symptoms were observed after 1 week and maintained over 52 weeks. During the first 12 weeks, treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 65 (37%) of 174 women in the fezolinetant 30 mg group, 75 (43%) of 173 in the fezolinetant 45 mg group, and 78 (45%) of 175 in the placebo group. The incidence of liver enzyme elevations was low (placebo n=1; fezolinetant 30 mg n=2; fezolinetant 45 mg n=0) and these events were generally asymptomatic, transient, and resolved while on treatment or after treatment discontinuation. INTERPRETATION: Data support the clinical use of fezolinetant as a non-hormonal treatment for vasomotor symptoms associated with menopause. The study was placebo-controlled for 12 weeks followed by a 40-week blinded extension to assess the maintenance of effect. Furthermore, the population studied was diverse and representative of the potential target population for fezolinetant therapy. Further characterisation of the benefit of fezolinetant on quality of life, including on symptoms of mood and sexual wellbeing, merits investigation. FUNDING: Astellas Pharma.

Safety of Fezolinetant for Vasomotor Symptoms Associated With Menopause: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety, tolerability, and effect of fezolinetant on endometrial health over 52 weeks. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, 52-week safety study (SKYLIGHT 4 [Study to Find Out How Safe Long-term Treatment With Fezolinetant is in Women With Hot Flashes Going Through Menopause]) of placebo, fezolinetant 30 mg, and fezolinetant 45 mg once daily (1:1:1). Participants were postmenopausal and seeking treatment for vasomotor symptoms associated with menopause. Primary endpoints were treatment-emergent adverse events, percentage of participants with endometrial hyperplasia, and percentage with endometrial malignancy. Endometrial hyperplasia or malignancy was evaluated according to U.S. Food and Drug Administration guidance (point estimate of 1% or less with an upper bound of one-sided 95% CI of 4% or less). Secondary endpoints included change in bone mineral density (BMD) and trabecular bone score. A sample size of 1,740 was calculated to enable observation of one or more events (≈80% probability for events with background rate of less than 1%). RESULTS: A total of 1,830 participants were randomized and took one or more medication dose (July 2019-January 2022). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 64.1% (391/610) of the placebo group, 67.9% (415/611) of the fezolinetant 30-mg group, and 63.9% (389/609) of the fezolinetant 45-mg group. Treatment-emergent adverse events leading to discontinuation were similar across groups (placebo, 26/610 [4.3%]; fezolinetant 30 mg, 34/611 [5.6%]; fezolinetant 45 mg, 28/609 [4.6%]). Endometrial safety was assessed in 599 participants. In the fezolinetant 45-mg group, 1 of 203 participants had endometrial hyperplasia (0.5%; upper limit of one-sided 95% CI 2.3%); there were no cases in the placebo (0/186) or fezolinetant 30 mg (0/210) group. Endometrial malignancy occurred in 1 of 210 in the fezolinetant 30-mg group (0.5%; 95% CI 2.2%) with no cases in the other groups. Liver enzyme elevations more than three times the upper limit of normal occurred in 6 of 583 placebo, 8 of 590 fezolinetant 30 mg, and 12 of 589 fezolinetant 45 mg participants; no Hy's law cases were reported (ie, no severe drug-induced liver injury with alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase more than three times the upper limit of normal and total bilirubin more than two times the upper limit of normal, with no elevation of alkaline phosphatase and no other reason to explain the combination). Changes in BMD and trabecular bone score were similar across groups. CONCLUSION: Results from SKYLIGHT 4 confirm the 52-week safety and tolerability of fezolinetant and support its continued development. FUNDING SOURCE: Astellas Pharma Inc. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04003389.

Efficacy and Safety of Fezolinetant in Moderate to Severe Vasomotor Symptoms Associated With Menopause: A Phase 3 RCT.

CONTEXT: Vasomotor symptoms (VMS) are common, bothersome, and can persist for years before and after menopause. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess efficacy/safety of fezolinetant for treatment of moderate to severe VMS associated with menopause. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, 12-week phase 3 trial with a 40-week active treatment extension (NCT04003142; SKYLIGHT 2), women aged 40 to 65 years with minimum average 7 moderate to severe VMS/day were randomized to 12 weeks of once-daily placebo, fezolinetant 30 mg, or fezolinetant 45 mg. Completers were rerandomized to fezolinetant 30/45 mg for 40 additional weeks. Coprimary efficacy endpoints were mean daily change from baseline to week 4 (W4) and W12 in VMS frequency and severity. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: Both fezolinetant doses statistically significantly reduced VMS frequency/severity at W4 and W12 vs placebo. For VMS frequency, W4 least squares mean (SE) reduction vs placebo: fezolinetant 30 mg, -1.82 (0.46; P < .001); 45 mg, -2.55 (0.46; P < .001); W12: 30 mg, -1.86 (0.55; P < .001); 45 mg, -2.53 (0.55; P < .001). For VMS severity, W4: 30 mg, -0.15 (0.06; P < .05); 45 mg, -0.29 (0.06; P < .001); W12: 30 mg, -0.16 (0.08; P < .05); 45 mg, -0.29 (0.08; P < .001). Improvement in VMS frequency and severity was observed by W1 and maintained through W52. Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were infrequent, reported by 2%, 1%, and 0% of those receiving fezolinetant 30 mg, fezolinetant 45 mg, and placebo, respectively. CONCLUSION: Daily fezolinetant 30 and 45 mg were efficacious and well tolerated for treating moderate to severe VMS associated with menopause.

Cardiometabolic profiles in children and adults with overweight and obesity and down syndrome.

Individuals with Down syndrome (DS) are at increased risk for being overweight/obese, but the associated cardiometabolic risk (CR) is not clear. Cross-sectional anthropometric and clinical laboratory data from a multi-site, international cohort of individuals with DS were analyzed to determine cardiometabolic risk by reporting observed distributions of cardiometabolic biomarkers in overweight/obese individuals with DS throughout the lifespan. Descriptive statistics and regression analyses by age categories determined the distributive percentiles for cardiometabolic biomarkers and tested for adiposity as a predictor of CR. Across seven DS clinics, data were collected on 240 patients between the ages of 3 and 63 years, with one quarter overweight and three quarters obese among children and nearly all adults being obese. In children and adults, most cardiometabolic biomarker profiles showed distributive values within normal ranges. Blood lipids were positively associated with body mass index (BMI) in children (high density lipid-cholesterol, p = 0.01; low density lipid-cholesterol, p = 0.02). Levels of hs-CRP were elevated in both children and adults, with BMI positively associated with hs-CRP in adults with DS (p = 0.04). Liver enzyme values were positively associated with BMI in children and adults. The data suggest that in contrast to the general population, in individuals with Down syndrome, being overweight and obese does not appear to confer a significantly increased risk for cardiometabolic disease by biomarker profile. Individuals with DS who are overweight/obese appear to have unique cardiometabolic profiles unrelated to adiposity, notable for increased hs-CRP and normal HA1c levels.

A Systematic Review of Fragile X-Associated Neuropsychiatric Disorders.

OBJECTIVE: Fragile X premutation carriers are reported to have increased neuropsychiatric problems, and thus the term fragile X-associated neuropsychiatric disorders (FXAND) has been proposed. Unfortunately, published prevalence estimates of these phenomena are inconsistent. This systematic review clarified this issue by reviewing both fragile X premutation prevalence in patients with neurodevelopmental disorders and psychiatric disorder prevalence in premutation carriers without fragile X-associated tremor/ataxia syndrome (FXTAS). Average prevalence was derived from studies that used semistructured clinical interviews, diagnostic criteria, and validated rating scales. METHODS: Forty-six studies were reviewed. The rate of fragile X premutation in neurodevelopmental disorders was assessed from five studies. Probands with neurodevelopmental disorders were more likely than those in the general population to be premutation carriers. The rate of psychiatric disorders in premutation carriers was assessed from five studies for neurodevelopmental, 13 studies for mood, 12 studies for anxiety, and two studies for psychotic disorders. The phenotype and sex distribution among premutation carriers were similar to those with fragile X syndrome. RESULTS: Compared to control group and general population estimates, the most prevalent psychiatric disorders were neurodevelopmental disorders, anxiety disorders, and bipolar II disorder. Psychiatric disorders were also more common in males. Most studies relied only on past medical history to define the prevalence of psychiatric disorders, yielding variability in results. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies are needed to avoid bias by identifying cohorts from population-based sampling, to describe cohort demographic characteristics to elucidate differences in age and sex, and to prioritize the use of validated psychiatric assessment methods.

Unexplained regression in Down syndrome: Management of 51 patients in an international patient database.

Research to guide clinicians in the management of the devastating regression which can affect adolescents and young adults with Down syndrome is limited. A multi-site, international, longitudinal cohort of individuals with a clinical diagnosis of Unexplained Regression in Down syndrome (URDS) was collated through seven Down syndrome clinics. Tiered medical evaluation, a 28-item core symptom list, and interim management are described naturalistically. Improvement-defined by the percentage of baseline function on a Parent-reported Functional Score, overall improvement in symptoms on a Clinician-administered Functional Assessment, or report of management type being associated with improvement-was analyzed. Improvement rates using ECT, IVIG, and others were compared. Across seven clinics, 51 patients with URDS had regression at age 17.6 years, on average, and showed an average 14.1 out of 28 symptoms. Longitudinal improvement in function was achieved in many patients and the medical management, types of treatment, and their impact on function are described. Management with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) was significantly associated with higher rate of improvement in symptoms at the next visit (p = 0.001). Our longitudinal data demonstrates that URDS is treatable, with various forms of clinical management and has a variable course. The data suggests that IVIG may be an effective treatment in some individuals. Our description of the management approaches used in this cohort lays the groundwork for future research, such as development of standardized objective outcome measure and creation of a clinical practice guideline for URDS.

A Phase I study of the safety, pharmacokinetics and efficacy of navitoclax plus docetaxel in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Aim: This Phase I study investigated safety of navitoclax and docetaxel in patients (n = 41) with advanced solid tumors. Patients & methods: Two navitoclax plus docetaxel dosing schedules (21 and 28 days) were evaluated. Maximum tolerated dose, dose-limiting toxicities and preliminary antitumor activity were assessed. Results: Ten (24%) patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities; dose-escalation cohorts: n = 7 (21-day schedule: n = 5; 28-day schedule: n = 2) and 21-day expanded safety cohort: n = 3. Navitoclax 150-mg days 1-5 every 21 days with docetaxel 75 mg/m2 day 1 was the maximum tolerated dose and optimal schedule. Adverse events included thrombocytopenia (63%), fatigue (61%), nausea (59%) and neutropenia (51%). Four confirmed partial responses occurred. Conclusion: Navitoclax 150-mg orally once/day was safely administered with docetaxel. Myelosuppression limited dose escalation; antitumor activity was observed. Clinical trial registration: NCT00888108 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Psychopathology of adolescents with an intellectual disability who present to general hospital services.

OBJECTIVE: Adolescents with intellectual disability have increased rates of psychopathology compared with their typically developing peers and present to hospital more frequently for ambulant conditions. The aim of this study is to describe the psychopathology and related characteristics of a sample of adolescents with intellectual disability who presented to general hospital services. METHOD: We investigated a cohort of adolescents with intellectual disability in South East Queensland, Australia between January 2006 and June 2010. Demographic and clinical data were obtained via mailed questionnaires and from general practice notes. Psychopathology was measured with the Short Form of the Developmental Behaviour Checklist. RESULTS: Of 98 individuals presenting to hospital, 71 (72.5%) had significant levels of psychopathology. Unknown aetiology for the intellectual disability was associated with presence of problem behaviours. Adolescents with more severe intellectual disability were more likely to have major problem behaviours. Co-morbid physical health issues were not associated with psychopathology. Only 12 (12.1%) adolescents had undergone specialized mental health intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The general hospital environment may offer opportunities for liaison psychiatry services to screen and provide management expertise for adolescent individuals with intellectual disability presenting for physical health issues.

Prescribing psychotropic drugs to adults with an intellectual disability.

Mental illness is common in people with intellectual disability. They may also have physical health problems which can affect their mental state. Difficulties in communication can contribute to mental health problems being overlooked. These may present with changes in behaviour. Psychological management is usually preferable to prescribing psychotropic drugs. Behavioural approaches are the most appropriate way to manage challenging behaviour. If a drug is considered, prescribers should complete a thorough diagnostic assessment, exclude physical and environmental contributions to symptoms, and consider medical comorbidities before prescribing. Where possible avoid psychotropics with the highest cardiometabolic burden. Prescribe the minimum effective dose and treatment length, and regularly monitor drug efficacy and adverse effects. There is insufficient evidence to support the use of psychotropics for challenging behaviour. They should be avoided unless the behaviour is severe and non-responsive to other treatments.

Interprofessional Teamwork and Collaboration Between Community Health Workers and Healthcare Teams: An Integrative Review.

OBJECTIVES: Community Health Workers (CHWs) serve as a means of improving outcomes for underserved populations. However, their relationship within health care teams is not well studied. The purpose of this integrative review was to examine published research reports that demonstrated positive health outcomes as a result of CHW intervention to identify interprofessional teamwork and collaboration between CHWs and health care teams. METHODS: A total of 47 studies spanning 33 years were reviewed using an integrative literature review methodology for evidence to support the following assumptions of effective interprofessional teamwork between CHWs and health care teams: (1) shared understanding of roles, norms, values, and goals of the team; (2) egalitarianism; (3) cooperation; (4) interdependence; and(5) synergy. RESULTS: Of the 47 studies, 12 reported at least one assumption of effective interprofessional teamwork. Four studies demonstrated all 5 assumptions of interprofessional teamwork. CONCLUSIONS: Four studies identified in this integrative review serve as exemplars for effective interprofessional teamwork between CHWs and health care teams. Further study is needed to describe the nature of interprofessional teamwork and collaboration in relation to patient health outcomes.

A phase I clinical trial of navitoclax, a targeted high-affinity Bcl-2 family inhibitor, in combination with gemcitabine in patients with solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To investigate the safety, optimal dosing, pharmacokinetics and clinical activity of a regimen of navitoclax (ABT-263) combined with gemcitabine in patients with solid tumors. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with solid tumors for which gemcitabine was deemed an appropriate therapy were enrolled into one of two different dosing schedules (21-day dosing schedule: navitoclax administered orally on days 1-3 and 8-10,; and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8; 28-day dosing schedule: navitoclax administrated orally on days 1-3, 8-10, and 15-17; and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8 and 15). Navitoclax doses were escalated from 150 to 425 mg. An expanded safety cohort was conducted for the 21-day dosing schedule at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of navitoclax. RESULTS: Forty-six patients were enrolled at three U.S. centers. The most common adverse events included: hematologic abnormalities (thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and anemia), liver enzyme elevations (ALT and AST), and gastrointestinal disturbances (diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting). Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) observed in cycle 1 were grade 4 thrombocytopenia (2 patients), grade 4 neutropenia (1 patient), and grade 3 AST elevation (2 patients). The MTD of navitoclax was 325 mg co-administered with gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) for the 21-day schedule. No clinically significant pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions were observed. There were no objective responses. Stable disease, reported at the end of cycle 2, was the best response in 54 % of evaluable patients (n = 39). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of navitoclax 325 mg with gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) was generally well tolerated and exhibited a favorable safety profile in patients with advanced solid tumors.