Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis by previous treatment: post hoc analysis of phase II/III trials.

BACKGROUND: This study sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis with distinct treatment histories. METHODS: Pooled phase II/III trial data from patients who received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily or placebo, as monotherapy or with conventional synthetic (cs) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), were analyzed post hoc. Separate evaluations were conducted for populations with a prior inadequate response (IR) to: 1) non-methotrexate (MTX) csDMARDs only (non-MTX csDMARD-IR; n = 537); 2) MTX (MTX-IR; n = 3113); and 3) biologic (b)DMARDs (bDMARD-IR; n = 782). Efficacy outcomes included rates of response (American College of Rheumatology 20/50/70% response criteria) and remission (Disease Activity Score in 28 joints derived from 4 measures, erythrocyte sedimentation rate [DAS28-4(ESR)] < 2.6) at month 3, and changes from baseline in DAS28-4(ESR) and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index scores. Safety was assessed up to month 24. RESULTS: At month 3, efficacy was generally improved with tofacitinib (both doses) vs placebo in each population. Generally, efficacy outcomes with tofacitinib were numerically more favorable in non-MTX csDMARD-IR vs MTX-IR or bDMARD-IR patients. Over 24 months, crude incidence rates for adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, and discontinuations due to AEs were generally numerically lower in non-MTX csDMARD-IR and MTX-IR vs bDMARD-IR populations; rates for AEs of special interest were generally similar across populations. CONCLUSIONS: Tofacitinib provided clinical benefit across patients with rheumatoid arthritis with a range of prior treatment experience but may have greater efficacy and an improved benefit/risk profile in those with fewer prior treatments. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00147498/NCT00413660/NCT00550446/NCT00603512/NCT00687193/NCT00976599/NCT01359150/NCT00847613/NCT00814307/NCT00853385/NCT00960440/NCT01039688/NCT00856544.

Impact of access to treatment on patient-reported outcomes among rheumatoid arthritis patients with tDMARDs and bDMARDS in two Latin-American countries: A prospective observational study.

Background and Aims: A noninterventional prospective study was performed in Colombia and Peru. The aim was to describe the impact of access to treatment on Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in patients with Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) after failure to conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in real-life conditions. Methods: The impact of access to treatment was measured by access barriers, time to supply (TtS) and interruption evaluating their effect in changes of PROs between baseline and 6-month follow-up between February 2017 and November 2019. The association of access to care with disease activity, functional status, health-related quality of life was assessed using bivariate and multivariable analysis. Results are expressed in least mean difference; TtS in mean number of days for delivery of treatment at baseline. Variability measures were standard deviation and standard error. Results: One hundred seventy patients were recruited, 70 treated with tofacitinib and 100 with biological DMARDs. Thirty-nine patients reported access barriers. The mean of TtS was 23 ± 38.83 days. The difference from baseline to 6-month visit in PROs were affected by access barriers and interruptions. There was not statistically significant difference in the of PRO's score among visits in patients that reported delay of supply of more than 23 days compared to patients with less days of delay. Conclusion: This study suggested the access to treatment can affect the response to the treatment at 6 months of follow-up. There seems to be no effect in the PROs for delay of TtS during the studied period.

A Qualitative Study to Develop and Evaluate the Content Validity of the Vitiligo Patient Priority Outcome (ViPPO) Measures.

INTRODUCTION: Vitiligo can be associated with a psychological burden, stigmatization and impaired quality of life. Tools to assess the impact of vitiligo exist; however, none were developed in line with the FDA's patient-reported outcome (PRO) Guidance for Industry. This study aimed to explore the content validity of two newly developed PRO measures to assess the impact of facial and total body vitiligo on how patients feel and function. METHODS: Draft PRO measures were developed from existing literature and input from PRO experts, a patient advocate and a clinical expert. Qualitative interviews were conducted with US participants living with vitiligo and international dermatologists with vitiligo expertise. Concept elicitation methodology explored the relevance of concepts in the draft PRO, while cognitive debriefing assessed conceptual relevance and understanding/interpretation. Items were iteratively amended/added throughout the interview study. RESULTS: The 60 participants included adults (n = 48, 63% female, 18-62 years old) and adolescents (n = 12, 67% female, 12-17 years old) with Fitzpatrick Skin Types I-VI. Expert dermatologists from the US (n = 8), EU (n = 4), India (n = 1) and Egypt (n = 1) participated. Concept elicitation was utilized to confirm the signs/symptoms of vitiligo and the associated impact on emotional/psychological wellbeing, social functioning, daily life and work/school. Conceptual saturation was achieved. Most participants reported impacts on their emotional/psychological wellbeing (n = 57, 95%), e.g. feeling self-conscious (n = 35, 58%). Participants reported impacts on social functioning (n = 53, 88%), e.g. vitiligo being noticed by others (n = 42, 70%). There was general consensus between participants and expert dermatologists. Cognitive debriefing confirmed that the items were well understood. Most items were conceptually relevant; feeling self-conscious and feeling frustrated were highly endorsed. Items were removed based on low conceptual relevance (feeling abandoned, skin roughness) and expected redundancy (four items), resulting in two measures with three proposed domain scores: Emotional/Psychological Wellbeing; Social Functioning; and Physical Sensation. No comprehension concerns were observed in relation to the 7-day recall period or the item response scale/options. Eight dermatologists reviewed the PRO measures, confirming comprehensiveness and relevance. CONCLUSION: The draft Vitiligo Patient Priority Outcomes (ViPPO) measures evaluate the impact of facial (ViPPO-F) and total body (ViPPO-T) vitiligo on emotional/psychological and social functioning. The ViPPO measures are well understood, comprehensive and content valid for adults and adolescents with vitiligo.

Meaningful Changes in What Matters to Individuals with Vitiligo: Content Validity and Meaningful Change Thresholds of the Vitiligo Area Scoring Index (VASI).

INTRODUCTION: This study explored patients' and dermatologists' priority outcomes for treatment to address, clinical outcome assessments (COA) for use in vitiligo clinical trials, and perceptions of within-patient meaningful change in facial and total body vitiligo. METHODS: Semistructured, individual, qualitative interviews were conducted with patients living with non-segmental vitiligo in the USA and with expert dermatologists in vitiligo. Concept elicitation discussions included open-ended questions to identify patient priority outcomes. Vitiligo COAs were reviewed by dermatologists. Tasks were completed by patients to explore their perceptions of meaningful changes in vitiligo outcomes; dermatologists' opinions were elicited. Data were analyzed using thematic methods; meaningful change tasks were descriptively summarized. RESULTS: Individuals with vitiligo (N = 60) included adults (n = 48, 63% female) and adolescents (n = 12, 67% female). All Fitzpatrick Skin Types were represented. Eight (13%) were first- or second-generation immigrants to the USA. Expert dermatologists (N = 14) participated from the USA (n = 8), EU (n = 4), India (n = 1), and Egypt (n = 1). All individuals with vitiligo reported experiencing skin depigmentation; an observable clinical sign of vitiligo. Most confirmed that lesion surface area (n = 59/60, 98%) and level of pigmentation (n = 53/60, 88%) were important to include in disease assessments. Following an explanation, participants (n = 49/60, 82%) felt that the Facial Vitiligo Area Scoring Index (F-VASI) measurement generally made sense and understood that doctors would use it to assess facial vitiligo. Most participants felt that a 75% (n = 47/59, 80%) or 9 0% improvement in their facial vitiligo would be indicative of treatment success (n = 55/59, 93%). In the context of evaluating a systemic oral treatment for vitiligo, dermatologists perceived a 75% improvement on the F-VASI as successful (n = 9/14, 64%). Regarding the Total VASI (T-VASI) score, n = 30 participants considered 33% improvement as treatment success; an additional n = 10 endorsed 50% improvement and a further n = 5 endorsed 75% improvement. Clinicians most frequently identified 50% (n = 6/14, 43%) or 75% (n = 4/14, 29%) improvement in T-VASI as successful. CONCLUSION: Repigmentation is a priority outcome for patients. The VASI was considered an appropriate tool to assess the extent of vitiligo. A minimum 75% improvement from baseline in the F-VASI and minimum 50% improvement from baseline in the T-VASI were identified as within-patient clinically meaningful thresholds.

Impact of Tofacitinib on Components of the ACR Response Criteria: Post Hoc Analysis of Phase III and Phase IIIb/IV Trials.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of tofacitinib (TOF) on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response criteria components in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: This post hoc analysis pooled data from RA phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing TOF 5 or 10 mg BID, adalimumab (ADA), or placebo, with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, and a phase IIIb/IV RCT assessing TOF 5 mg BID monotherapy, TOF 5 mg BID with methotrexate (MTX), or ADA with MTX. Outcomes included proportions of patients achieving ACR20/50/70 responses and ≥ 20/50/70% improvement rates in ACR components at week 2 and months 1, 3, and 6; and mean percent improvement in ACR components and Clinical or Simplified Disease Activity Index (CDAI or SDAI) low disease activity or remission rates, at month 3, for ACR20/50/70 responders. RESULTS: Across treatment groups, ≥ 20/50/70% improvement rates were numerically higher for most physician- vs patient-reported measures. In phase III RCTs, at earlier timepoints, ≥ 50/70% improvements in patient global assessment of disease activity, pain, and physician global assessment were similar. Among ACR20 responders receiving TOF, mean percent improvements for tender and swollen joint counts were > 70% at month 3. CDAI/SDAI remission was achieved at month 3 by 27.8-45.0% of ACR70 responders receiving TOF. CONCLUSION: Among ACR20 responders treated with TOF, physician-reported components particularly exceeded 20% response improvement. At month 3, disease state generally did not corroborate ACR70 response criteria. Divergences between physician- and patient-reported measures highlight the importance of identifying appropriate patient-reported outcome targets to manage RA symptoms in clinical practice. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00847613/NCT00856544/NCT00853385/NCT02187055).

Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib modified-release 11 mg once daily plus methotrexate in adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis: 24-week open-label phase results from a phase 3b/4 methotrexate withdrawal non-inferiority study (ORAL Shift).

OBJECTIVES: To report the efficacy, safety and patient-reported outcome measures (PROs) of tofacitinib modified-release 11 mg once daily plus methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from the open-label phase of Oral Rheumatoid Arthritis Trial (ORAL) Shift. METHODS: ORAL Shift was a global, 48-week, phase 3b/4 withdrawal study in patients with moderate to severe RA and an inadequate response to methotrexate. Patients received open-label tofacitinib modified-release 11 mg once daily plus methotrexate; those who achieved low disease activity (LDA; Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI)≤10) at week 24 were randomised to receive blinded tofacitinib 11 mg once daily plus placebo (ie, blinded methotrexate withdrawal) or continue with blinded tofacitinib 11 mg once daily plus methotrexate for another 24 weeks. Efficacy, PROs and safety from the open-label phase are reported descriptively. RESULTS: Following screening, 694 patients were enrolled and received tofacitinib plus methotrexate in the open-label phase. At week 24, 527 (84.5%) patients achieved CDAI-defined LDA. Improvements from baseline to weeks 12 and 24 were generally observed for all efficacy outcomes (including measures of disease activity, and response, LDA and remission rates) and PROs. Adverse events (AEs), serious AEs and discontinuations due to AEs were reported by 362 (52.2%), 20 (2.9%) and 41 (5.9%) patients, respectively. No deaths were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Tofacitinib modified-release 11 mg once daily plus methotrexate conferred improvements in disease activity measures, functional outcomes and PROs, with most (84.5%) patients achieving CDAI-defined LDA after 24 weeks of open-label treatment; the safety profile was generally consistent with the historic safety profile of tofacitinib.Funded by Pfizer Inc; NCT02831855.

Real-World Evidence to Contextualize Clinical Trial Results and Inform Regulatory Decisions: Tofacitinib Modified-Release Once-Daily vs Immediate-Release Twice-Daily for Rheumatoid Arthritis.

INTRODUCTION: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). To provide additional clinical evidence in regulatory submissions for a modified-release (MR) once-daily (QD) tofacitinib formulation, we compared real-world adherence and effectiveness between patients initiating the MR QD formulation and patients initiating an immediate-release (IR) twice-daily (BID) formulation. METHODS: Two noninterventional cohort studies were conducted. First, adherence and two effectiveness proxies were compared between patients with RA who newly initiated tofacitinib MR 11 mg QD or IR 5 mg BID in the IBM® MarketScan® Commercial and Medicare Supplemental US insurance claims databases (March 2016-October 2018). Second, using data collected in the Corrona US RA Registry (February 2016-August 2019), two Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI)-based measures of effectiveness were compared between tofacitinib MR 11 mg QD and IR 5 mg BID, and against noninferiority criteria derived from placebo-controlled clinical trials of the tofacitinib IR formulation. Multiple sensitivity analyses of the registry data were conducted to reassure regulators of consistent results across different assumptions. RESULTS: In each study, approximately two-thirds of patients initiated the MR formulation. In the claims database study, improved adherence and at least comparable effectiveness were observed with tofacitinib MR vs IR over 12 months, particularly in patients without prior advanced therapy. In the registry study, the noninferiority of tofacitinib MR vs IR was demonstrated for both CDAI outcomes at ~6 months; this finding was robust across multiple sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate the value of real-world evidence from complementary data sources in understanding the impact of medication adherence with a QD formulation in clinical practice. These analyses were suitable for regulatory consideration as an important component of evidence for the comparability of tofacitinib MR 11 mg QD vs IR 5 mg BID in patients with RA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Claims database study: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04018001, retrospectively registered July 12, 2019. Corrona US RA Registry study: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04267380, retrospectively registered February 12, 2020.

Efficacy of tofacitinib in reducing pain in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis or ankylosing spondylitis.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the efficacy of tofacitinib in reducing pain in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) or ankylosing spondylitis (AS) in a post-hoc analysis of randomised controlled trials. METHODS: Data were collected from patients in seven tofacitinib studies: six phase III (four RA, two PsA) and one phase II study (AS), and grouped into five analysis populations based on rheumatic disease diagnosis and category of prior inadequate response (IR) to treatment: conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs-IR (RA and PsA), tumour necrosis factor inhibitors-IR (RA and PsA), or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs-IR (AS). Only patients who received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily or placebo were included. Pain assessments included: Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain, Short-Form Health Survey 36v2 Question (Q)7 and Bodily Pain domain, Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life Q9 and Q14, EuroQol Five Dimensions Pain/Discomfort dimension and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index Q2 and Q3. Data were reported to month 6 (placebo to month 3) in the RA and PsA populations, and week 12 (tofacitinib and placebo) in the AS population. RESULTS: Overall, 3330 patients were included in this analysis. In the RA and PsA populations, pain improvements in tofacitinib-treated patients compared with placebo were observed at the earliest time point assessed and at month 3 (maintained to month 6). In the AS population, pain improvements compared with placebo were observed at week 12. CONCLUSION: Tofacitinib was associated with rapid and sustained improvements across multiple pain measures in patients with inflammatory rheumatic musculoskeletal diseases.

Modified- versus immediate-release tofacitinib in Japanese rheumatoid arthritis patients: a randomized, phase III, non-inferiority study.

Objective: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for treatment of RA. We compared tofacitinib modified-release (MR) 11 mg once daily (QD) with tofacitinib immediate-release (IR) 5 mg twice daily (BID) in Japanese patients with RA and inadequate response to MTX. Methods: Phase III, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, 12-week study. Patients were randomized to tofacitinib MR 11 mg QD (n = 104) or IR 5 mg BID (n = 105), with stable MTX. Compliance was based on returned pill counts. The primary objective was to demonstrate non-inferiority of MR 11 mg QD to IR 5 mg BID. Non-inferiority was declared if the upper bound of the two-sided 95% CI for the difference in change from baseline in DAS28-4(CRP) at week 12 was <0.6. Results: At week 12, with tofacitinib MR 11 mg QD and IR 5 mg BID, respectively, the change from baseline in least squares mean DAS28-4(CRP) was -2.43 and -2.85; the mean difference was 0.43 (95% CI 0.17, 0.69). Non-inferiority of MR 11 mg QD to IR 5 mg BID was not met. Improvement of DAS28-4(CRP) ⩾1.2 was observed in 89 and 85% of patients, respectively, corresponding to a clinically important, significant change in both groups. The frequency of adverse events (52.9 and 51.4%, respectively) and serious adverse events (4.8 and 3.8%, respectively) was generally similar between treatments. No deaths were reported. Conclusion: Non-inferiority of MR 11 mg QD to IR 5 mg BID was not met in this study. However, clinically meaningful improvements in RA were observed with both tofacitinib formulations in Japanese patients. The safety profile was similar with both formulations. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02281552.

Methotrexate withdrawal in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who achieve low disease activity with tofacitinib modified-release 11 mg once daily plus methotrexate (ORAL Shift): a randomised, phase 3b/4, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor used for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. We assessed the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib after methotrexate withdrawal in patients who achieved low disease activity (LDA) with tofacitinib in combination with methotrexate. METHODS: ORAL Shift was a phase 3b/4 non-inferiority trial in patients aged at least 18 years with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to methotrexate done in 109 centres across 16 countries. After 24 weeks of open-label tofacitinib modified-release 11 mg once daily plus methotrexate, patients who achieved LDA (clinical disease activity index [CDAI] ≤10) were randomly assigned 1:1 via an automated web-based response system to receive tofacitinib plus placebo (tofacitinib monotherapy; ie, masked methotrexate withdrawal) or continue tofacitinib plus methotrexate for 24 weeks in a double-blind manner. The primary endpoint was the least squares mean change from week 24 to week 48 in disease activity score in 28 joints with four variables, including erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-4[ESR]). The primary analysis was done in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment in both phases, and safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment since enrolment. Non-inferiority of tofacitinib monotherapy versus tofacitinib plus methotrexate was declared if the upper bound of the 95% CI for the difference in change in DAS28-4(ESR) between treatment groups was less than 0·6. Safety was assessed in both phases. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02831855, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Sept 1, 2016, and Nov 1, 2017, 694 patients were enrolled in the open-label phase and 623 received study treatment for 24 weeks. 533 achieved CDAI-defined LDA and were randomly assigned into the double-blind phase (267 in the tofacitinib monotherapy group and 266 in the tofacitinib plus methotrexate group). Three participants in the monotherapy group did not start treatment so were not included in the primary analysis. Non-inferiority was demonstrated (difference 0·30 [95% CI 0·12-0·48]). 107 (41%) of 264 patients in the tofacitinib monotherapy group and 109 (41%) of 266 in the tofacitinib plus methotrexate group had adverse events; five patients from each group discontinued because of adverse events; two patients died in the tofacitinib plus methotrexate group. No new safety findings were reported up to 48 weeks. INTERPRETATION: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis who achieve LDA with a combination of tofacitinib plus methotrexate may consider withdrawing methotrexate without significant worsening of disease activity or unexpected safety issues. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Tofacitinib versus Biologic Treatments in Moderate-to-Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Who Have Had an Inadequate Response to Nonbiologic DMARDs: Systematic Literature Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Objective. To compare the efficacy and tolerability of tofacitinib, an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), as monotherapy and combined with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) versus biological DMARDs (bDMARDs) and other novel DMARDs for second-line moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients by means of a systematic literature review (SLR) and network meta-analysis (NMA). Methods. MEDLINE®, EMBASE®, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published between 1990 and March 2015. Efficacy data based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response criteria, improvements in the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at 6 months, and discontinuation rates due to adverse events were analyzed by means of Bayesian NMAs. Results. 45 RCTs were identified, the majority of which demonstrated a low risk of bias. Tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily (BID) and 10 mg BID monotherapy exhibited comparable efficacy and discontinuation rates due to adverse events versus other monotherapies. Tofacitinib 5 mg BID and 10 mg BID + DMARDs or methotrexate (MTX) were mostly comparable to other combination therapies in terms of efficacy and discontinuation due to adverse events. Conclusion. In most cases, tofacitinib had similar efficacy and discontinuation rates due to adverse events compared to biologic DMARDs.

Economic impact of switching from metoprolol to nebivolol for hypertension treatment: a retrospective database analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the real-world economic impact of switching hypertensive patients from metoprolol, a commonly prescribed, generic, non-vasodilatory ß1-blocker, to nebivolol, a branded-protected vasodilatory ß1-blocker. METHODS: Retrospective analysis with a pre-post study design was conducted using the MarketScan database (2007-2011). Hypertensive patients continuously treated with metoprolol for ≥6 months (pre-period) and then switched to nebivolol for ≥6 months (post-period) were identified. The index date for switching was defined as the first nebivolol dispensing date. Data were collected for the two 6-month periods pre- and post-switching. Monthly healthcare resource utilization and healthcare costs pre- and post-switching were calculated and compared using Wilcoxon test and paired t-test. Medical costs at different years were inflated to the 2011 dollar. RESULTS: In total, 2259 patients (mean age: 60 years; male: 52%; cardiovascular [CV] disease: 37%) met the selection criteria. Switching to nebivolol was associated with statistically significant reductions in the number of all-cause hospitalization (-33%; p < 0.01), CV-related hospitalizations (-60%; p < 0.01), and outpatient visits (-7%; p < 0.01). Monthly inpatient costs were reduced by $111 (p < 0.01), while monthly drug costs increased by $52 (p < 0.01). No statistically significant differences were found in overall costs and costs of outpatient or ER visits. Sensitivity analyses, conducted using various lengths of medication exposure, controlling for spill-over effect or excluding patients with compelling indications for metoprolol, all found some level of reduction in resource utilization and no significant difference in overall healthcare costs. CONCLUSIONS: This real-world study suggests that switching from metoprolol to nebivolol is associated with an increase in medication costs and significant reductions in hospitalizations and outpatient visits upon switching, resulting in an overall neutral effect on healthcare costs. These results may be interpreted with caution due to lack of a comparator group and confounding control caused by design and limitations inherent in insurance claims data.

Nebivolol monotherapy in younger adults (younger than 55 years) with hypertension: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

Nebivolol, a vasodilatory ß1-blocker, may be well suited for the hemodynamics of the younger hypertensive patient. In this 8-week trial, 18- to 54-year-olds with a diastolic blood pressure (DBP) of 95 mm Hg to 109 mm Hg who completed a 4-week placebo-only phase were randomized to receive nebivolol (5 mg/d, titrated to 10-20 mg/d based on achievement of blood pressure <140/90 mm Hg [n=427]) or placebo (n=214). Primary and secondary efficacy parameters were changes in trough seated DBP and systolic blood pressure (SBP), respectively. Safety parameters included adverse events (AEs). The baseline mean age was 45.3 years; SBP/DBP, 154/100 mm Hg; and heart rate, 78 beats per minute. Completion rates were 91.3% (nebivolol) and 88.3% (placebo). At endpoint, there was a significant effect of nebivolol over placebo for DBP (-11.8 mm Hg vs -5.5 mm Hg, P<.001) and SBP (-13.7 mm Hg vs -5.5 mm Hg, P<.001). Total AE rates were 34.7% (nebivolol) and 32.2% (placebo). Nebivolol monotherapy is efficacious and well tolerated in adults younger than 55 years of age with increased DBP.

Efficacy and safety of nebivolol in Hispanics with stage I-II hypertension: a randomized placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Hispanics have lower rates of hypertension control compared with black and white patients. Nebivolol is a vasodilatory ß1-selective blocker, with neutral metabolic effects. This phase IV trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of nebivolol in Hispanics with stage I-II hypertension. METHODS: Self-identified Hispanics with stage I-II hypertension were randomized to receive a double-blind treatment: placebo (n = 136) or nebivolol (n = 141, starting dose 5 mg/day) for 8 weeks. Nebivolol dosage could be uptitrated at 2-week intervals to 10, 20, or 40 mg/day, as needed to achieve diastolic blood pressure (DBP) control (JNC7 criteria). Efficacy outcome measures were the mean changes from baseline to the end of week 8 in trough-seated DBP (primary) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) (secondary). Safety and tolerability were also assessed. RESULTS: Baseline SBP/DBP (mmHg) was similar in both treatment groups (nebivolol: 156/100; placebo: 157/101). A total of 135 (96%) and 121 (89%) nebivolol- and placebo-treated participants completed the double-blind phase, respectively. Compared with the placebo, nebivolol treatment was associated with significant mean reductions in both trough-seated DBP and SBP (DBP: -11.1 mmHg vs. -7.3 mmHg, p < 0.0001; SBP: -14.1 mmHg vs. -9.3 mmHg; p = 0.001). Treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) rates were 17% (nebivolol) and 22% (placebo); the most frequent TEAEs were headache (4% vs. 6%, respectively), upper respiratory tract infection (2% vs. 2%), and dizziness (1% vs. 3%). CONCLUSIONS: In Hispanics with stage I-II hypertension, 8-week nebivolol monotherapy resulted in significant reductions in blood pressure. The safety and tolerability profile of nebivolol was similar to that of placebo.

Efficacy and safety of disodium ascorbyl phytostanol phosphates in men with moderate dyslipidemia.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the efficacy, safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of a novel cholesterol absorption inhibitor, FM-VP4, comprising disodium ascorbyl sitostanol phosphate (DASP) and disodium ascorbyl campestanol phosphate (DACP). METHODS: In phase 1, 30 men received a single dose of 100, 200, 400, 800, 1,600, or 2,000 mg FM-VP4 or placebo. In phase 2, 100 men were treated with 100, 200, 400, or 800 mg/day of FM-VP4 or placebo for 4 weeks. RESULTS: The drug was well tolerated at each single or multiple dose level. After 4 weeks of treatment, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels changed by 2.7% in the placebo group and by 2.9%, -4.2%, and -4.6% in the 100, 200, and 800 mg/day groups, respectively, which was not statistically significant. However, 400 mg/day of FM-VP4 significantly decreased LDL-C by 6.5% (p=0.02). Phase 1 showed that DACP and DASP were absorbed into plasma with a median t(max) of 12 h for both components, and clearance was slow with a mean t(1/2lambda) of 57 h. During 4 weeks of treatment, steady state was reached by approximately 8 days. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that up to 800 mg/day of FM-VP4 is safe and well tolerated for at least 4 weeks. Furthermore, the higher doses significantly reduced LDL-C by 7% compared with baseline or by 10% compared with placebo, with the maximum effect reached at 400 mg/day.

Determining the critical micelle concentration of a novel lipid-lowering agent, disodium ascorbyl phytostanyl phosphate (FM-VP4), using a fluorescence depolarization procedure.

The objective of this study was to determine the critical micelle concentration (CMC) of a novel water-soluble plant sterol derivative (FM-VP4) using a fluorescence depolarization method. The CMC was determined by 1,6-diphenyl-1,3,5-hexatriene (DPH) fluorescence depolarization. Test solutions of various concentrations of sodium dodecylsulphate (SDS) as a positive control or FM-VP4 in water were spiked with 2 microL of 4 mM DPH in tetrahydrofuran (THF) and left overnight to equilibrate in a dark chamber. Fluorescence of each solution was measured at room temperature using a Perseptive Biosystems Cytofluor Series 4000 multi-well plate reader. Fluorescence intensity increases as DPH is incorporated into the hydrophobic core of micelles. Thus, the CMC is the value at which an abrupt increase in intensity is observed. These points were observed at 8 mM and 0.014 mM for SDS and FM-VP4, respectively. Sodium dodecylsulphate was used as a positive control and supports the validity of our results, as the literature values of SDS are reported to be between 8-8.3 mM. The CMC of FM-VP4 is reported to be 0.014 mM.

Development and characterization of liposomal disodium ascorbyl phytostanyl phosphates (FM-VP4).

The specific objectives of this project were (1) to develop liposomal disodium ascorbyl phytostanyl phosphate (FM-VP4) formulations, (2) to develop a liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) assay for quantification of FM-VP4 in liposomal formulations and plasma sample, and (3) to characterize liposomal FM-VP4 formulations by finding optimal drug-to-lipid ratios and determining the degradation of FM-VP4 in liposomes. Section 2 describes an LC/MS/MS assay developed for the identification and quantification of FM-VP4 in liposomal formulations to provide estimates of drug concentrations and encapsulation efficiency. The extra step of removing plasma proteins prior to LC/MS/MS assay yields an analysis of FM-VP4 in plasma samples. Section 3 describes experiments designed to find the optimal drug-to-lipid ratio for liposomal FM-VP4 formulations by comparing encapsulation efficiencies and varying the lipid compositions. Additionally, this section details our degradation studies to determine if liposomes have any protective effects on FM-VP4; these studies tested various lipid compositions at 37 degrees C in rabbit plasma. The mechanism of how FM-VP4 lowers low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and total cholesterol levels in various animal models is presently unknown. However, before the mechanism of action could be studied, FM-VP4 first had to be delivered efficiently into plasma or cultured cell. The low systemic bioavailability and cellular uptake of FM-VP4 further suggested the importance of finding an efficient delivery vehicle for this drug. This project proposed a framework for such delivery and paves the way for further investigation into how FM-VP4 works in vivo and in vitro.

Development of novel water-soluble phytostanol analogs: disodium ascorbyl phytostanyl phosphates (FM-VP4): preclinical pharmacology, pharmacokinetics and toxicology.

FM-VP4 is a novel inhibitor of cholesterol absorption that has lipid lowering and body weight reducing properties. In vitro and in vivo studies were performed to investigate the lipid-lowering effects, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, and toxicity of FM-VP4. FM-VP4 decreased cholesterol accumulation in Caco-2 cells by approximately 50%; its activity appeared to be independent of pancreatic lipase, p-glycoprotein, or cholesterol incorporation in micelles. In animal studies, FM-VP4 was added to the diet or drinking water and the following results were obtained. In gerbils 2% FM-VP4 produced mean 56 and 53% reduction in total cholesterol (TC) after 4 and 8 weeks, respectively. This reduction was entirely due to the loss of the low-density lipoprotein (LDL) pool, which was reduced to undetectable levels at either time point. At 8 weeks, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) concentration had risen by a mean of 34% whereas total triglyceride (TG) concentrations had decreased by a mean of 60%. FM-VP4 also had a profound effect on body weight in these animals. At 8 weeks, the mean body weight was in the 4% FM-VP4 treatment group 25% lower than in the control group. No hepatic or renal toxicity was associated with these changes. In Apo E-deficient mice, after 4- and 8-week treatments FM-VP4 caused a significant decrease in both TC and TG concentrations compared to controls. After 12 weeks, the areas of atherosclerotic lesion involvement in the aortic roots were decreased by a mean of 80% in the 0.5, 1, and 2% FM-VP4 treatment groups compared to controls. Taken together, these results suggest that FM-VP4 is a potential new drug with lipid-lowering and weight loss potential, without apparent toxicity.

Disodium ascorbyl phytostanyl phosphate reduces plasma cholesterol concentrations and atherosclerotic lesion formation in apolipoprotein E-deficient mice.

Disodium ascorbyl phytostanyl phosphate (FM-VP4) consists of ascorbic acid covalently bound to phytostanols by a phosphodiester linkage and is derived as the disodium salt. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the lipid-lowering and antiatherosclerotic properties of FM-VP4 following administration to apolipoprotein E (ApoE)-deficient mice. Four-week-old male C57BL/6J mice with a homozygous deletion of the ApoE gene (apolipoprotein E knock-out) were administered 0 (control), 0.1%, 0.5%, 1.0%, and 2.0% (wt/vol) FM-VP4 in their drinking water or 2.0% FM-VP4 (wt/wt) in their diet for 12 consecutive weeks. All animals received a standard mouse chow diet consisting of 9.0% (wt/wt) fat and 0.2% (wt/wt) cholesterol. Plasma cholesterol and triglyceride levels were determined at baseline and at 4-week intervals (4, 8, and 12 weeks) throughout the term of the study. At the end of the study, mice were killed using CO(2) gas, and blood was taken from the heart. The heart and aorta were removed and sections of the aortic roots were stained with oil red O (ORO) and Movat's stain. The lesions found in this area were measured using a computer-assisted image analysis. Consumption of FM-VP4 by either food or drinking water routes was associated with an approximately 75% reduction in total plasma cholesterol levels and a 75% decrease in aortic atherosclerotic lesion area in ApoE-deficient mice over 12 weeks compared to controls. A trend in decreasing plasma triglyceride levels was also observed. Taken together these data suggest that FM-VP4 has both lipid-lowering and antiatherosclerotic properties following 12-week administration to ApoE-deficient mice.