Tirzepatide after intensive lifestyle intervention in adults with overweight or obesity: the SURMOUNT-3 phase 3 trial.

The effects of tirzepatide, a glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, on weight reduction after successful intensive lifestyle intervention are unknown. This double-blind, placebo-controlled trial randomized (1:1) adults with body mass index ≥30 or ≥27 kg/m2 and at least one obesity-related complication (excluding diabetes), who achieved ≥5.0% weight reduction after a 12-week intensive lifestyle intervention, to tirzepatide maximum tolerated dose (10 or 15 mg) or placebo once weekly for 72 weeks (n = 579). The treatment regimen estimand assessed effects regardless of treatment adherence in the intention-to-treat population. The coprimary endpoint of additional mean per cent weight change from randomization to week 72 was met with changes of -18.4% (standard error (s.e.) 0.7) with tirzepatide and 2.5% (s.e. 1.0) with placebo (estimated treatment difference -20.8 percentage points (95% confidence interval (CI) -23.2%, -18.5%; P < 0.001). The coprimary endpoint of the percentage of participants achieving additional weight reduction ≥5% was met with 87.5% (s.e. 2.2) with tirzepatide and 16.5% (s.e. 3.0) with placebo achieving this threshold (odds ratio 34.6%; 95% CI 19.2%, 62.6%; P < 0.001). The most common adverse events with tirzepatide were gastrointestinal, with most being mild to moderate in severity. Tirzepatide provided substantial additional reduction in body weight in participants who had achieved ≥5.0% weight reduction with intensive lifestyle intervention. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT04657016 .

Efficacy and safety results by menopausal status in monarchE: adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy in patients with HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer.

Background: Abemaciclib is the first and only cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 inhibitor approved for adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-), node-positive, and high-risk early breast cancer (EBC), with indications varying by geography. Premenopausal patients with HR+, HER2- tumors may have different tumor biology and treatment response compared to postmenopausal patients. Objectives: We describe the efficacy and safety of abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) for the large subgroup of premenopausal patients with HR+, HER2- EBC in monarchE. Design: Randomized patients (1:1) received adjuvant ET with or without abemaciclib for 2 years plus at least 3 additional years of ET as clinically indicated. Methods: Patients were stratified by menopausal status (premenopausal versus postmenopausal) at diagnosis. Standard ET (tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitor) with or without gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist was determined by physician's choice. Invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) by menopausal status were assessed at data cutoff on 1 April 2021 (median follow-up of 27 months). Results: Among randomized patients, 2451 (43.5%) were premenopausal and 3181 (56.4%) were postmenopausal. The choice of ET for premenopausal patients varied considerably between countries. Treatment benefit was consistent across menopausal status, with a numerically greater effect size in premenopausal patients. For premenopausal patients, abemaciclib with ET resulted in a 42.2% and 40.3% reduction in the risk of developing IDFS and DRFS events, respectively. Absolute improvement at 3 years was 5.7% for IDFS and 4.4% for DRFS rates. Safety profile for premenopausal patients was consistent with the overall safety population. Conclusion: Abemaciclib with ET demonstrated clinically meaningful treatment benefit for IDFS and DRFS versus ET alone regardless of menopausal status and first ET, with a numerically greater benefit in the premenopausal compared to the postmenopausal population. Safety data in premenopausal patients are consistent with the overall safety profile of abemaciclib.

Treatment With Adjuvant Abemaciclib Plus Endocrine Therapy in Patients With High-risk Early Breast Cancer Who Received Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Prespecified Analysis of the monarchE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Patients selected to receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) are usually those at higher risk of relapse, and there is a need to find better therapeutic options for these patients. Objective: To determine the efficacy and safety outcomes for patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive, ERBB2 (formerly HER2)-, high-risk early breast cancer enrolled in the randomized clinical trial monarchE who received NAC. Design, Setting, and Participants: The monarchE randomized clinical trial was a multicenter, phase 3, open-label study that evaluated adjuvant treatment with abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) compared with ET alone in patients with HR+, ERBB2-, and node-positive early breast cancer who were at high risk of recurrence. Patients were recruited between July 2017 and August 2019 from 603 sites in 38 countries. This subgroup analysis was performed with primary outcome data, with a cutoff date of July 8, 2020. Intervention: Enrolled patients were randomized (1:1) to receive standard of care ET for at least 5 years with or without treatment with abemaciclib (150 mg, twice daily) for 2 years (treatment period) or until criteria were met for discontinuation. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prior chemotherapy (NAC vs adjuvant vs none) was a stratification factor in monarchE, and and a prespecified exploratory analysis included outcomes in patients who received NAC. The data presented in this article are from the primary outcome analysis (395 invasive disease-free survival [IDFS] events; cutoff date, July 8, 2020; median follow-up 19 months [IQR, 15.6-23.9 months]). Invasive disease-free survival (the primary end point of monarchE) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) were evaluated using the Cox proportional hazard model and Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Of the 5637 patients (mean [SD] age, 49.9 [10.6] years; 2046 women [99.5%]; 462 Asian [22.8%], 54 Black [2.7%], and 1473 White participants [70.8%]) enrolled in monarchE, 2056 (37%) received treatment with NAC. In this subgroup, treatment with abemaciclib and ET demonstrated clinically meaningful benefit in IDFS (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47-0.80) and DRFS (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.46-0.81), which corresponded with an absolute improvement of 6.6% in 2-year IDFS rates and 6.7% in 2-year DRFS rates. A consistent treatment benefit was observed across subgroups of pathological breast tumor size or number of positive lymph nodes at surgery. Conclusions and Relevance: In the randomized clinical trial monarchE, treatment with adjuvant abemaciclib combined with ET demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement in IDFS and DRFS for patients with HR+, ERBB2-, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer who received NAC before trial enrollment. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03155997.

MONARCH 3 final PFS: a randomized study of abemaciclib as initial therapy for advanced breast cancer.

At the MONARCH 3 interim analysis, abemaciclib plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (AI) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) with a tolerable safety profile as initial treatment for hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC). MONARCH 3 is a randomized, phase III, double-blind study of abemaciclib/placebo (150 mg twice daily, continuous) plus nonsteroidal AI (1 mg anastrozole or 2.5 mg letrozole, daily). A total of 493 postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- ABC with no prior systemic therapy in this setting were enrolled. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS (final analysis after 240 events); other endpoints included response and safety evaluations. Here we analyze the final PFS data and update secondary endpoints. The abemaciclib arm had a significantly longer median PFS than the placebo arm (28.18 versus 14.76 months; hazard ratio [95% confidence interval], 0.540 [0.418-0.698]; p = .000002). The ORR was 61.0% in the abemaciclib arm versus 45.5% in the placebo arm (measurable disease, p = .003). The median duration of response was longer in the abemaciclib arm (27.39 months) compared to the placebo arm (17.46 months). The safety profile was consistent with previous reports. The most frequent grade ≥ 3 adverse events in the abemaciclib versus placebo arms were neutropenia (23.9% versus 1.2%), diarrhea (9.5% versus 1.2%), and leukopenia (8.6% versus 0.6%). Abemaciclib plus a nonsteroidal AI was an effective initial treatment with an acceptable safety profile for HR+, HER2- ABC.

MONARCH 3: Abemaciclib As Initial Therapy for Advanced Breast Cancer.

Purpose Abemaciclib, a cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitor, demonstrated efficacy as monotherapy and in combination with fulvestrant in women with hormone receptor (HR)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative advanced breast cancer previously treated with endocrine therapy. Methods MONARCH 3 is a double-blind, randomized phase III study of abemaciclib or placebo plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor in 493 postmenopausal women with HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer who had no prior systemic therapy in the advanced setting. Patients received abemaciclib or placebo (150 mg twice daily continuous schedule) plus either 1 mg anastrozole or 2.5 mg letrozole, daily. The primary objective was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Secondary objectives included response evaluation and safety. A planned interim analysis occurred after 189 events. Results Median progression-free survival was significantly prolonged in the abemaciclib arm (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.72; P = .000021; median: not reached in the abemaciclib arm, 14.7 months in the placebo arm). In patients with measurable disease, the objective response rate was 59% in the abemaciclib arm and 44% in the placebo arm ( P = .004). In the abemaciclib arm, diarrhea was the most frequent adverse effect (81.3%) but was mainly grade 1 (44.6%). Comparing abemaciclib and placebo, the most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (21.1% v 1.2%), diarrhea (9.5% v 1.2%), and leukopenia (7.6% v 0.6%). Conclusion Abemaciclib plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor was effective as initial therapy, significantly improving progression-free survival and objective response rate and demonstrating a tolerable safety profile in women with HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer.

Mibampator (LY451395) randomized clinical trial for agitation/aggression in Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: Mibampator, an amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazole propionic acid receptor potentiator, was evaluated for treatment of agitation and aggression (A/A) in Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS: Outpatients (n = 132) with probable AD and A/A randomized to 12 weeks of double-blind treatment with 3-mg po mibampator or placebo were assessed using the 4-domain A/A subscale of the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI-4-A/A) derived from the Neuropsychiatric Inventory. Secondary measures included the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory, Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia, Frontal Systems Behavior Inventory (FrSBe), and Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive. Efficacy was analyzed using mixed-effects model repeated measures from baseline to endpoint. Adverse events (AEs), labs, vital signs, and electrocardiograms were monitored. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. Both groups improved on the NPI-4-A/A, but without group differences. Among secondaries, mibampator was significantly better (p = 0.007) than placebo only on the FrSBe. AEs were similar between groups. One death occurred in the placebo group. CONCLUSION: Possible explanations for no significant group differences include caregiver, drug target engagement, and design issues. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov; ID: NCT00843518.

Frontolimbic atrophy is associated with agitation and aggression in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: The neuroanatomy of agitation and aggression in Alzheimer's disease is not well understood. METHODS: We analyzed 24 months of Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative data for patients with Alzheimer's disease, mild cognitive impairment-stable, and mild cognitive impairment-converter (n = 462) using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire Agitation and Aggression subscale. Magnetic resonance imaging regions of interest that correlated with Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire Agitation and Aggression subscale raw scores were included in mixed-model, repeated-measures analyses of agitation and aggression over time with age, sex, apolipoprotein E ε4 status, education, and Mini-Mental State Examination score as covariates. RESULTS: Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire Agitation and Aggression subscale scores worsened in patients with Alzheimer's disease and in mild cognitive impairment-converter (P < .05; trend for mild cognitive impairment, P = .0518). Greater agitation and aggression severity was associated with greater atrophy of frontal, insular, amygdala, cingulate, and hippocampal regions of interest (P < .05). Mini-Mental State Examination score was significant in mixed-effect model repeated measures only in mild cognitive impairment-converters for posterior regions of interest. Demographics and apolipoprotein ε4 were not associated with agitation and aggression. CONCLUSIONS: Agitation and aggression in Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment is associated with neurodegeneration affecting the anterior salience network that may reduce capacity to process and regulate behaviors properly.

Influence of sub-syndromal symptoms after remission from manic or mixed episodes.

BACKGROUND: Sub-syndromal symptoms in bipolar disorder impair functioning and diminish quality of life. AIMS: To examine factors associated with time spent with sub-syndromal symptoms and to characterise how these symptoms influence outcomes. METHOD: In a double-blind randomised maintenance trial, patients received either olanzapine or lithium monotherapy for 1 year. Stepwise logistic regression models were used to identify factors that were significant predictors of percentage time spent with sub-syndromal symptoms. The presence of sub-syndromal symptoms during the first 8 weeks was examined as a predictor of subsequent relapse. RESULTS: Presence of sub-syndromal depressive symptoms during the first 8 weeks significantly increased the likelihood of depressive relapse (relative risk 4.67, P<0.001). Patients with psychotic features and those with a greater number of previous depressive episodes were more likely to experience sub-syndromal depressive symptoms (RR=2.51, P<0.001 and RR=2.35, P=0.03 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: These findings help to identify patients at increased risk of affective relapse and suggest that appropriate therapeutic interventions should be considered even when syndromal-level symptoms are absent.