A Phase III Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial to Evaluate Efficacy and Safety of Romosozumab in Men With Osteoporosis.

Context: Globally, one in five men aged >50 years is predicted to experience an osteoporotic fracture. Because of the treatment gap in osteoporosis and the paucity of bone-forming agents for men, new osteoporosis treatments are needed. Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of romosozumab in men with osteoporosis. Design: Phase III randomized BRIDGE study (placebo-controlled double-blind study evaluating the efficacy and safety of romosozumab in treating men with osteoporosis; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02186171) for 12 months. Setting: Thirty-one centers in Europe, Latin America, Japan, and North America. Patients: Men aged 55 to 90 years with a baseline bone mineral density (BMD) T-score at the lumbar spine (LS), total hip (TH), or femoral neck of ≤-2.5 or ≤-1.5 with a history of a fragility nonvertebral or vertebral fracture. Interventions: The subjects were randomized 2:1 to receive romosozumab 210 mg subcutaneously monthly or placebo for 12 months. Main Outcome Measures: The primary efficacy endpoint was percentage change from baseline in LS BMD at month 12. Results: In 245 subjects (163 romosozumab, 82 placebo), at month 12, the mean percentage change from baseline in the LS and TH BMD was significantly greater for the romosozumab group than for the placebo group (LS, 12.1% vs 1.2%; TH, 2.5% vs -0.5%; P < 0.001). Adverse events and serious adverse events were balanced between the two groups, with a numerical imbalance in the positively adjudicated cardiovascular serious adverse events [romosozumab, 8 (4.9%) vs placebo, 2 (2.5%)]. Conclusions: Treatment with romosozumab for 12 months increased the spine and hip BMD compared with placebo and was well tolerated in men with osteoporosis.

Romosozumab FRAME Study: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Role of Regional Background Fracture Risk on Nonvertebral Fracture Outcome.

In the pivotal Fracture Study in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis (FRAME; NCT01575834), 1 year of the bone-forming agent romosozumab significantly reduced new vertebral and clinical fracture risk versus placebo. Nonvertebral fracture risk was not significantly reduced in the overall population, influenced by a low placebo-group fracture rate, observed particularly in the highest-enrolling region of Latin America. In year 1 of FRAME, postmenopausal women with a T-score of -2.5 to -3.5 at the total hip or femoral neck were randomized to subcutaneous romosozumab 210 mg or placebo once monthly for 12 months. Of 7180 randomized women, 43% were from Latin America, largely Colombia and Brazil. Prespecified analyses assessed fracture risk reductions by geographic regions. A significant treatment-by-geographic region interaction for the clinical (p = 0.029) and nonvertebral fracture (p = 0.042) endpoints led to further characterization of the Latin American population and comparison with the remaining study population, grouped post hoc as rest-of-world. Nonvertebral fracture efficacy in the overall population was also assessed by baseline fracture risk using the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX). Romosozumab significantly and consistently reduced new vertebral fracture risk in Latin America (70% reduction; p = 0.014) and rest-of-world (74% reduction; p < 0.001). For nonvertebral fracture, risk reductions were observed in rest-of-world (42% reduction; p = 0.012), with no treatment effect observed in Latin America, where background nonvertebral fracture risk was low (1.2% in the placebo group). Consistent with this finding, in the overall population, greater reductions in nonvertebral fracture risk were observed among women with higher FRAX scores. These findings suggest that fracture risk assessment should consider regional factors in addition to classical risk factors, such as bone mineral density. In women at high risk for fracture, romosozumab reduced nonvertebral fracture risk within 1 year. © 2018 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Effects of 24 Months of Treatment With Romosozumab Followed by 12 Months of Denosumab or Placebo in Postmenopausal Women With Low Bone Mineral Density: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase 2, Parallel Group Study.

Over 12 months, romosozumab increased bone formation and decreased bone resorption, resulting in increased bone mineral density (BMD) in postmenopausal women with low BMD (NCT00896532). Herein, we report the study extension evaluating 24 months of treatment with romosozumab, discontinuation of romosozumab, alendronate followed by romosozumab, and romosozumab followed by denosumab. Postmenopausal women aged 55 to 85 years with a lumbar spine (LS), total hip (TH), or femoral neck T-score ≤-2.0 and ≥-3.5 were enrolled and randomly assigned to placebo, one of five romosozumab regimens (70 mg, 140 mg, 210 mg monthly [QM]; 140 mg Q3M; 210 mg Q3M) for 24 months, or open-label alendronate for 12 months followed by romosozumab 140 mg QM for 12 months. Eligible participants were then rerandomized 1:1 within original treatment groups to placebo or denosumab 60 mg Q6M for an additional 12 months. Percentage change from baseline in BMD and bone turnover markers (BTMs) at months 24 and 36 and safety were evaluated. Of 364 participants initially randomized to romosozumab, placebo, or alendronate, 315 completed 24 months of treatment and 248 completed the extension. Romosozumab markedly increased LS and TH BMD through month 24, with largest gains observed with romosozumab 210 mg QM (LS = 15.1%; TH = 5.4%). Women receiving romosozumab who transitioned to denosumab continued to accrue BMD, whereas BMD returned toward pretreatment levels with placebo. With romosozumab 210 mg QM, bone formation marker P1NP initially increased after treatment initiation and gradually decreased to below baseline by month 12, remaining below baseline through month 24; bone resorption marker ß-CTX rapidly decreased after treatment, remaining below baseline through month 24. Transition to denosumab further decreased both BTMs, whereas after transition to placebo, P1NP returned to baseline and ß-CTX increased above baseline. Adverse events were balanced between treatment groups through month 36. These data suggest that treatment effects of romosozumab are reversible upon discontinuation and further augmented by denosumab. © 2018 The Authors Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Romosozumab or Alendronate for Fracture Prevention in Women with Osteoporosis.

BACKGROUND: Romosozumab is a monoclonal antibody that binds to and inhibits sclerostin, increases bone formation, and decreases bone resorption. METHODS: We enrolled 4093 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis and a fragility fracture and randomly assigned them in a 1:1 ratio to receive monthly subcutaneous romosozumab (210 mg) or weekly oral alendronate (70 mg) in a blinded fashion for 12 months, followed by open-label alendronate in both groups. The primary end points were the cumulative incidence of new vertebral fracture at 24 months and the cumulative incidence of clinical fracture (nonvertebral and symptomatic vertebral fracture) at the time of the primary analysis (after clinical fractures had been confirmed in ≥330 patients). Secondary end points included the incidences of nonvertebral and hip fracture at the time of the primary analysis. Serious cardiovascular adverse events, osteonecrosis of the jaw, and atypical femoral fractures were adjudicated. RESULTS: Over a period of 24 months, a 48% lower risk of new vertebral fractures was observed in the romosozumab-to-alendronate group (6.2% [127 of 2046 patients]) than in the alendronate-to-alendronate group (11.9% [243 of 2047 patients]) (P<0.001). Clinical fractures occurred in 198 of 2046 patients (9.7%) in the romosozumab-to-alendronate group versus 266 of 2047 patients (13.0%) in the alendronate-to-alendronate group, representing a 27% lower risk with romosozumab (P<0.001). The risk of nonvertebral fractures was lower by 19% in the romosozumab-to-alendronate group than in the alendronate-to-alendronate group (178 of 2046 patients [8.7%] vs. 217 of 2047 patients [10.6%]; P=0.04), and the risk of hip fracture was lower by 38% (41 of 2046 patients [2.0%] vs. 66 of 2047 patients [3.2%]; P=0.02). Overall adverse events and serious adverse events were balanced between the two groups. During year 1, positively adjudicated serious cardiovascular adverse events were observed more often with romosozumab than with alendronate (50 of 2040 patients [2.5%] vs. 38 of 2014 patients [1.9%]). During the open-label alendronate period, adjudicated events of osteonecrosis of the jaw (1 event each in the romosozumab-to-alendronate and alendronate-to-alendronate groups) and atypical femoral fracture (2 events and 4 events, respectively) were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In postmenopausal women with osteoporosis who were at high risk for fracture, romosozumab treatment for 12 months followed by alendronate resulted in a significantly lower risk of fracture than alendronate alone. (Funded by Amgen and others; ARCH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01631214 .).

Romosozumab Treatment in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis.

BACKGROUND: Romosozumab, a monoclonal antibody that binds sclerostin, increases bone formation and decreases bone resorption. METHODS: We enrolled 7180 postmenopausal women who had a T score of -2.5 to -3.5 at the total hip or femoral neck. Patients were randomly assigned to receive subcutaneous injections of romosozumab (at a dose of 210 mg) or placebo monthly for 12 months; thereafter, patients in each group received denosumab for 12 months, at a dose of 60 mg, administered subcutaneously every 6 months. The coprimary end points were the cumulative incidences of new vertebral fractures at 12 months and 24 months. Secondary end points included clinical (a composite of nonvertebral and symptomatic vertebral) and nonvertebral fractures. RESULTS: At 12 months, new vertebral fractures had occurred in 16 of 3321 patients (0.5%) in the romosozumab group, as compared with 59 of 3322 (1.8%) in the placebo group (representing a 73% lower risk with romosozumab; P<0.001). Clinical fractures had occurred in 58 of 3589 patients (1.6%) in the romosozumab group, as compared with 90 of 3591 (2.5%) in the placebo group (a 36% lower risk with romosozumab; P=0.008). Nonvertebral fractures had occurred in 56 of 3589 patients (1.6%) in the romosozumab group and in 75 of 3591 (2.1%) in the placebo group (P=0.10). At 24 months, the rates of vertebral fractures were significantly lower in the romosozumab group than in the placebo group after each group made the transition to denosumab (0.6% [21 of 3325 patients] in the romosozumab group vs. 2.5% [84 of 3327] in the placebo group, a 75% lower risk with romosozumab; P<0.001). Adverse events, including instances of hyperostosis, cardiovascular events, osteoarthritis, and cancer, appeared to be balanced between the groups. One atypical femoral fracture and two cases of osteonecrosis of the jaw were observed in the romosozumab group. CONCLUSIONS: In postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, romosozumab was associated with a lower risk of vertebral fracture than placebo at 12 months and, after the transition to denosumab, at 24 months. The lower risk of clinical fracture that was seen with romosozumab was evident at 1 year. (Funded by Amgen and UCB Pharma; FRAME ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01575834 .).

A randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled efficacy and safety study of ALO-02 (extended-release oxycodone surrounding sequestered naltrexone) for moderate-to-severe chronic low back pain treatment.

The objective of this multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized withdrawal study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ALO-02, an abuse-deterrent formulation containing pellets of extended-release oxycodone hydrochloride (HCl) surrounding sequestered naltrexone HCl, compared with placebo in the treatment of moderate-to-severe chronic low back pain. An open-label titration period in which all patients received ALO-02 was followed by a double-blind treatment period where patients meeting treatment response criteria were randomized to either a fixed dose of ALO-02 or placebo. Daily average low back pain was assessed using an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS)-Pain. Of the 663 patients screened, 410 received ALO-02 during the open-label conversion and titration period and 281 patients were randomized to the double-blind treatment period (n = 134, placebo; n = 147, ALO-02). Change in the mean NRS-Pain score from randomization baseline to the final 2 weeks of the treatment period was significantly different favoring ALO-02 compared with placebo (P = 0.0114). Forty-four percent of patients treated with placebo and 57.5% of patients treated with ALO-02 reported ≥30% improvement in weekly average NRS-Pain scores from screening to the final 2 weeks of the treatment period (P = 0.0248). In the double-blind treatment period, 56.8% of patients in the ALO-02 group and 56.0% of patients in the placebo group experienced a treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE). The most common treatment-related TEAEs for ALO-02 during the treatment period were nausea, vomiting, and constipation, consistent with opioid therapy. ALO-02 has been demonstrated to provide significant reduction of pain in patients with chronic low back pain and has a safety profile similar to other opioids.

A multicenter, 12-month, open-label, single-arm safety study of oxycodone-hydrochloride/naltrexone-hydrochloride extended-release capsules (ALO-02) in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic noncancer pain.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term safety of oxycodone-hydrochloride and sequestered naltrexone-hydrochloride (ALO-02) administered for up to 12 months. DESIGN: Open-label, single-arm safety study. SETTING: Thirty-two US research centers (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01428583). PATIENTS: Three hundred ninety-five adults (opioid experienced and opioid naïve) with moderate-to-severe chronic noncancer pain (CNCP). INTERVENTIONS: Open-label, oral ALO-02 capsules, daily dose ranging from 20 to 160 mg oxycodone for up to 12 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number and type of adverse events (AEs) and drugrelated AEs, including assessments of withdrawal (Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale; COWS), pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and aberrant behaviors (Current Opioid Misuse Measure). RESULTS: A total of 193 (48.9 percent) patients received ALO-02 for ≥181 days and 105 (26.6 percent) patients for ≥361 days. The most common treatment-emergent AEs were nausea (25.3 percent), constipation (21.3 percent), vomiting (13.9 percent), and headache (11.6 percent). The most common drug-related AEs were constipation (18.0 percent), nausea (14.9 percent), somnolence (8.4 percent), fatigue (6.8 percent), dizziness (5.6 percent), and vomiting (5.1 percent). A majority of patients (86.6 percent) had a maximum COWS total score below the level for mild withdrawal symptoms at every visit throughout the study. Pain severity scores as measured by the short Form of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI-SF) decreased over time. CONCLUSIONS: Repeat dosing of ALO-02 for up to 12 months is safe and well tolerated in a CNCP population of both opioid-experienced and opioid-naïve patients. ALO-02 demonstrated a safety profile consistent with extended-release opioids and the expected analgesic efficacy. The addition of sequestered naltrexone had no significant clinical effect on patients when taken as directed.

Looking from the outside in: the use of video in attachment-based interventions.

This paper provides an account of multiple potential benefits of using video in clinical interventions designed to promote change in parent-child attachment relationships. The power of video to provide a unique perspective on parents' ways of thinking and feeling about their own behavior and that of their child will be discussed in terms of current attachment-based interventions using video either as the main component of the treatment or in addition to a more comprehensive treatment protocol. Interventions also range from those that use micro-analytic as compared to more global units of analyses, and there are potential bridges to be made with neuro-scientific research findings. In addition, this paper provides a clinical illustration of the utility of showing parents vignettes of video-filmed observations of parent-child interactions from the Group Attachment Based Intervention (GABI) for vulnerable families. Emphasis is placed on the motivational force arising from seeing (and hearing) oneself in interaction with one's child on video, thus serving as a powerful catalyst for reflective functioning and updating one's frame of reference for how to think, feel and behave with one's child.

Predictors of placebo response in pooled lamotrigine neuropathic pain clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES: One limitation of neuropathic pain clinical trials is the often large and variable extent of response in the placebo group, possibly obscuring true medication effects. We pooled data from 252 individuals in the placebo arms of 3 clinical trials of lamotrigine in patients with neuropathic pain to examine the relationship of baseline patient and study site characteristics with 12-week change in the Pain Intensity Numerical Rating Scale score (DeltaPI-NRS). The 574 patients in the pooled lamotrigine treatment arms were used as a replication dataset. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed univariable and multivariable regression analysis of predictors of DeltaPI-NRS. Clinical factors examined were baseline pain intensity score (mean daily PI-NRS over the week prior to randomization), age, sex, diagnosis, prior and concurrent gabapentin use, prior and concurrent tricyclic antidepressant use, pain duration, variability of daily pain scores during the baseline week, and slope of daily pain scores over the baseline week. Site factors evaluated were study site, US geographic region, recruitment rate, and recruitment period. RESULTS: Baseline PI-NRS and site recruitment rate were independent predictors of the 12-week DeltaPI-NRS in the last observation carried forward, observed case, and repeated measures analyses. Patients with higher baseline PI-NRS scores had a significantly greater 12-week reduction in pain intensity than patients with lower baseline scores. Patients within sites with a faster recruitment rate also had a significantly greater reduction of pain intensity than those in sites with slower recruitment. DISCUSSION: These results suggest that both patient and study site characteristics can influence the response in the placebo arms of neuropathic pain studies.