New Benchmarks on Demographic Disparities in Pivotal Trials Supporting FDA-Approved Drugs and Biologics.

BACKGROUND: A lack of diversity and representation in clinical trials is an established issue in drug development, and the COVID-19 pandemic increased awareness of the problem among the general public. This awareness has led to increased pressure on drug development sponsors, as well as additional attention and regulation from federal bodies, to improve the diversity of clinical trials. This study updates existing baselines regarding demographic disparities, as well as detecting early signs that the situation may be starting to improve. METHODS: Building on an existing dataset, this study collected and analyzed pivotal trial demographic data for drugs and biologics approved by the FDA between 2007 and 2021. Demographic data were collected from applications on the FDA website and clinicaltrials.gov, and compared to indication-specific demographic data when available, or US census estimates when they were not. Regression analyses were used to test for significant trends in reporting of demographic data and representation in pivotal trials, as well as the effect of representation on clinical trial duration and FDA review. RESULTS: Reporting of demographic data has improved significantly for all three demographic categories (sex, racial identity, and ethnic identity) over the observed time period (p < 0.0001). During this time period, overrepresentation of white participants has decreased significantly (p < 0.0001), and representation of Black participants has increased (p = 0.0003). Other racial and ethnic identities did not show significant trends. Representation of demographic subgroups was not significant predictors of trial duration except for the representation of Black participants, which was a negative correlation, indicating that as representation of Black participants increases, trial duration decreases (p = 0.0350).

Ventricular Arrhythmias Associated With Over-the-Counter and Recreational Opioids.

BACKGROUND: Epidemic increases in opioid deaths prompted policies limiting access to prescription opioids in North America. Consequently, the over-the-counter opioids loperamide (Imodium A-D) and mitragynine, the herbal ingredient in kratom, are increasingly used to avert withdrawal or induce euphoria. Arrhythmia events related to these nonscheduled drugs have not been systematically studied. OBJECTIVES: In this study, we sought to explore opioid-associated arrhythmia reporting in North America. METHODS: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS), Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition Adverse Event Reporting System (CAERS), and Canada Vigilance Adverse Reaction (CVAR) databases were searched (2015-2021). Reports involving nonprescription drugs (loperamide, mitragynine) and diphenoxylate/atropine (Lomotil) were identified. Methadone, a prescription opioid (full agonist), served as a positive control owing to its established arrhythmia risk. Buprenorphine (partial agonist) and naltrexone (pure antagonist), served as negative controls. Reports were classified according to Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities terminology. Significant disproportionate reporting required a proportional reporting ratio (PRR) of ≥2, ≥3 cases, and chi-square ≥4. Primary analysis used FAERS data, whereas CAERS and CVAR data were confirmatory. RESULTS: Methadone was disproportionately associated with ventricular arrhythmia reports (PRR: 6.6; 95% CI: 6.2-7.0; n = 1,163; chi-square = 5,456), including 852 (73%) fatalities. Loperamide was also significantly associated with arrhythmia (PRR: 3.2; 95% CI: 3.0-3.4; n = 1,008; chi-square = 1,537), including 371 (37%) deaths. Mitragynine demonstrated the highest signal (PRR: 8.9; 95% CI: 6.7-11.7; n = 46; chi-square = 315), with 42 (91%) deaths. Buprenorphine, diphenoxylate, and naltrexone were not associated with arrhythmia. Signals were similar in CVAR and CAERS. CONCLUSIONS: The nonprescription drugs loperamide and mitragynine are associated with disproportionate reports of life-threatening ventricular arrhythmia in North America.

The E/e' Ratio: As "Critical" As the Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction?

Ascertainment of the left ventricular ejection fraction is the primary reason for ordering echocardiography in the acute care setting; however, this parameter does not provide information regarding a patient's volume status. As such, it cannot be reliably used to inform decisions regarding intravenous fluid resuscitation or diuresis, particularly in undifferentiated dyspnea and hypotension. This is relevant given a national quality improvement exhortation to provide aggressive fluid resuscitation as part of a "sepsis bundle." This initiative must be tempered by the well-established increase in hospital mortality from providing intravenous fluid to patients with unrecognized heart failure, which may occur if sepsis is misdiagnosed. We describe herein, what is to our knowledge, the first description of a critically elevated Doppler ratio of mitral inflow peak E-wave velocity to the mean mitral annular velocity as a harbinger of sudden death from pulmonary edema in a patient treated with aggressive intravenous fluids as part of the "sepsis bundle." This is utilized as a springboard for proposing a clinical algorithm focused on expedited echocardiography. It emphasized the potential value of advancing markedly the diastolic assessment of filling pressure (ratio of mitral inflow peak E-wave velocity to the mean mitral annular velocity) in the acute care setting to a level of import comparable to the left ventricular ejection fraction.

Comparison of electrocardiograms (ECG) waveforms and centralized ECG measurements between a simple 6-lead mobile ECG device and a standard 12-lead ECG.

BACKGROUND: Interval duration measurements (IDMs) were compared between standard 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECGs) and 6-lead ECGs recorded with AliveCor's KardiaMobile 6L, a hand-held mobile device designed for use by patients at home. METHODS: Electrocardiograms were recorded within, on average, 15 min from 705 patients in Mayo Clinic's Windland Smith Rice Genetic Heart Rhythm Clinic. Interpretable 12-lead and 6-lead recordings were available for 685 out of 705 (97%) eligible patients. The most common diagnosis was congenital long QT syndrome (LQTS, 343/685 [50%]), followed by unaffected relatives and patients (146/685 [21%]), and patients with other genetic heart diseases, including hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (36 [5.2%]), arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy (23 [3.4%]), and idiopathic ventricular fibrillation (14 [2.0%]). IDMs were performed by a central ECG laboratory using lead II with a semi-automated technique. RESULTS: Despite differences in patient position (supine for 12-lead ECGs and sitting for 6-lead ECGs), mean IDMs were comparable, with mean values for the 12-lead and 6-lead ECGs for QTcF, heart rate, PR, and QRS differing by 2.6 ms, -5.5 beats per minute, 1.0 and 1.2 ms, respectively. Despite a modest difference in heart rate, intervals were close enough to allow a detection of clinically meaningful abnormalities. CONCLUSIONS: The 6-lead hand-held device is potentially useful for a clinical follow-up of remote patients, and for a safety follow-up of patients participating in clinical trials who cannot visit the investigational site. This technology may extend the use of 12-lead ECG recordings during the current COVID-19 pandemic as remote patient monitoring becomes more common in virtual or hybrid-design clinical studies.

Randomized study of adjunctive belimumab in participants with generalized myasthenia gravis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy and safety of belimumab, a fully human immunoglobulin G1λ monoclonal antibody against B-lymphocyte stimulator, in participants with generalized myasthenia gravis (MG) who remained symptomatic despite standard of care (SoC) therapy. METHODS: Eligible participants with MG were randomized 1:1 to receive IV belimumab 10 mg/kg or placebo in this phase II, placebo-controlled, multicenter, double-blind study (NCT01480596; BEL115123). Participants received SoC therapies throughout the 24-week treatment phase and 12-week follow-up period. The primary efficacy endpoint was mean change from baseline in the Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) scale at week 24; safety assessments included the frequency and severity of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs. RESULTS: Forty participants were randomized (placebo n = 22; belimumab n = 18). The mean change in QMG score from baseline at week 24 was not significantly different for belimumab vs placebo (p = 0.256). There were no statistically significant differences between treatment groups for secondary endpoints, including the MG Composite and MG-Activity of Daily Living scores. Acetylcholine receptor antibody levels decreased over time in both treatment groups. No unexpected AEs were identified and occurrence was similar in the belimumab (78%) and placebo (91%) groups. One participant receiving placebo died (severe sepsis) during the treatment phase. CONCLUSIONS: The primary endpoint was not met for belimumab in participants with generalized MG receiving SoC. There was no significant difference in mean change in the QMG score at week 24 for belimumab vs placebo. The safety profile of belimumab was consistent with previous systemic lupus erythematosus studies. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class I evidence that for participants with generalized MG, belimumab did not significantly improve QMG score compared with placebo.

Randomized clinical study of safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of RIPK1 inhibitor GSK2982772 in healthy volunteers.

GSK2982772 is a highly selective inhibitor of receptor-interacting protein kinase 1 (RIPK1) being developed to treat chronic inflammatory diseases. This first-in-human study evaluated safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and exploratory pharmacodynamics (PD) of GSK2982772 administered orally to healthy male volunteers. This was a Phase I, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study. In Part A, subjects received single ascending doses of GSK2982772 (0.1-120 mg) or placebo in a crossover design during each of 4 treatment periods. In Part B, subjects received repeat doses of GSK2982772 (20 mg once daily [QD] to up to 120 mg twice daily [BID]) or placebo for 14 days. Part C was an open-label relative bioavailability study comparing 20-mg tablets vs capsules. Safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), RIPK1 target engagement (TE), and pharmacodynamics (PD) were assessed. The most common adverse events (AEs) were contact dermatitis and headache. Most AEs were mild in intensity, and there were no deaths or serious AEs. The PK of GSK2982772 was approximately linear over the dose range studied (up to 120 mg BID). There was no evidence of drug accumulation upon repeat dosing. Greater than 90% RIPK1 TE was achieved over a 24-hour period for the 60-mg and 120-mg BID dosing regimens. Single and repeat doses of GSK2982772 were safe and well tolerated. PK profiles showed dose linearity. The high levels of RIPK1 TE support progression into Phase II clinical trials for further clinical development.

A randomised, double-blind study comparing the addition of bicalutamide with or without dutasteride to GnRH analogue therapy in men with non-metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Bicalutamide blocks androgen action and is frequently used in men with non-metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). By reducing intracellular dihydrotestosterone, dutasteride (dual 5-alpha reductase inhibitor) could increase the effectiveness of bicalutamide in this setting. The objective of the study is therefore to prospectively evaluate dutasteride plus bicalutamide in men with asymptomatic, non-metastatic CRPC with rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA). METHODS: Prostate cancer patients with rising PSA whilst on first-line androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) were randomised (1:1) in a double-blind trial to receive bicalutamide 50mg plus placebo or bicalutamide 50mg plus dutasteride 3.5mg once daily for 18 months. Randomisation was stratified by centre; treatment assignments were generated using GlaxoSmithKline's RandAll System. Subjects who completed 18 months could participate in the 2-year extension. Central laboratory and study sites/monitors remained treatment-blinded. Primary end-point was time to disease progression (TDP) up to 42 months (defined as PSA progression from baseline or nadir, radiographic disease progression, death from prostate cancer or receipt of rescue medication). FINDINGS: There was no statistically significant difference in TDP in 127 men treated with bicalutamide/dutasteride (n=62) compared with bicalutamide/placebo (n=65) (hazard ratio (HR)=0.94 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61, 1.46]; p=0.79). The estimated median TDP was 425 days (95% CI 302, 858) in the bicalutamide/placebo group and 623 days (95% CI 369, 730) in the bicalutamide/dutasteride group. There was no statistically significant difference between the treatment groups for any secondary efficacy end-points, including time to treatment failure or PSA response. In the multivariate analysis, age, non-White race, higher baseline testosterone and lower baseline PSA were associated with longer TDP. Adverse events were comparable between treatment groups. INTERPRETATION: In men with non-metastatic CRPC, adding dutasteride to bicalutamide did not significantly prolong TDP. Prospective data are provided concerning the common practice of using bicalutamide in this setting.

Atrial fibrillation: choosing an antiarrhythmic drug.

Atrial fibrillation is the most common arrhythmia encountered in clinical practice. The associated hemodynamic changes can lead to symptoms of palpitations, fatigue, light-headedness, or dyspnea. Extensive research in the use of antiarrhythmic drugs has been performed both to facilitate the conversion of atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm and to maintain normal sinus rhythm. The relative merits of a rhythm control versus rate control strategy are briefly discussed. Efficacy of the available agents for pharmacologic cardioversion is reviewed in detail. Important drugs for maintenance of sinus rhythm include amiodarone, flecainide, propafenone, sotalol, and dofetilide. Selection of the appropriate antiarrhythmic drug must be individualized to the clinical situation, with Class IC drugs being first-line agents in the absence of structural heart disease. Regardless of agent selected, appropriate monitoring for development of adverse effects is of utmost importance.

Real-world algorithms for the optimal use of drugs and devices in the patient post myocardial infarction and the future of post myocardial infarction management.

Patients with left ventricular dysfunction (LVD) are at increased risk for dying suddenly of cardiac causes. The most common causes of LVD are coronary artery disease (CAD) and myocardial infarction (MI). Aggressive intervention following MI is essential for minimizing the myocardial damage that leads to LVD and the subsequent risk for heart failure and sudden cardiac death. This article describes practical algorithms for managing the patient post MI to minimize such risks. The degree of LVD is a key factor for determining clinical management strategies in the patient post MI. Risk factor reduction and selective neurohormonal blockade, especially with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, are usually recommended in the presence or absence of LVD, along with early use of a beta blocker. In patients with LVD, more aggressive intervention includes extended use of a beta blocker. In cases of LVD progressed to heart failure, the mixed beta and alpha blocker carvedilol has improved outcomes significantly. In clinical trials, carvedilol has been demonstrated to have antiarrhythmic activity, a property that offers protection against sudden arrhythmic death in high-risk patients with LVD. Addition of an aldosterone antagonist is also advised in patients with heart failure. In selected patients with reduced ejection fractions, use of surgical/catheter treatment and device therapy offers further benefits.