Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of an intravenous nanocrystal formulation of meloxicam in the management of moderate-to-severe pain after bunionectomy.

OBJECTIVE: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluated the safety and efficacy of an intravenous (IV) nanocrystal formulation of meloxicam in subjects with moderate-to-severe pain following a standardized unilateral bunionectomy. METHODS: Fifty-nine subjects aged 18-72 years were randomized to receive doses of either 30 mg (n=20) or 60 mg (n=20) meloxicam IV or placebo (n=19), administered once daily as bolus IV injections over 15-30 seconds (two or three doses). Safety, the primary objective, was assessed by physical examination, clinical laboratory tests, and the incidence of adverse events (AEs). Efficacy was evaluated by examining summed pain intensity differences over the first 48 hours (SPID48) using analysis of covariance models. Use of opioid rescue analgesic agents was evaluated. RESULTS: Generally, AEs were mild-to-moderate in intensity, and their incidence was similar across the three treatment groups. No serious AEs were reported; there were no withdrawals due to AEs, including injection-related AEs. The estimated effect size for SPID48 versus placebo was 1.15 and 1.01 for meloxicam IV doses 30 mg and 60 mg, respectively (P≤0.01). Both doses produced significantly greater pain reductions versus placebo (P≤0.05) at all evaluated times/ intervals during the 48-hour period. The proportions of subjects with ≥30% and ≥50% overall reduction in pain from baseline after 6 and 24 hours were significantly higher with meloxicam IV 30 mg doses versus placebo, but not with meloxicam IV 60 mg doses. The time to first use of rescue medication was significantly longer versus placebo with meloxicam IV 60 mg (P<0.05), but not with meloxicam IV 30 mg doses. CONCLUSION: Meloxicam IV was generally safe and well tolerated in subjects with moderate-to-severe post-bunionectomy pain. Once-daily administration of meloxicam IV 30 mg and 60 mg exhibited rapid onset of analgesia (as early as 15 minutes) with maintenance of analgesic effect for two consecutive 24-hour periods.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of single-dose Canakinumab in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

PURPOSE: Interleukin (IL)-1ß, an inflammatory molecule, contributes to the development of atherothrombosis and worsening of islet ß-cell function. Canakinumab, a human monoclonal antibody, targets IL-1ß-dependent inflammation and reduces the vascular inflammatory biomarker, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), and other inflammatory cardiovascular biomarkers. Here, we aimed to assess the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic characteristics, including the effect on hsCRP, of canakinumab in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) after a 2-hour single-dose intravenous infusion. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation study was conducted in patients with T2DM (diagnosed ≥6 months before screening) on a stable daily dose of metformin. Patients were randomly assigned to receive a single intravenous dose of canakinumab 0.03, 0.1, 0.3, 1.5, or 10 mg/kg or placebo. The study was initially designed with 1 small cohort (15 patients, 0.3 mg/kg) on a stable dose of metformin ≥500 mg/d for an initial tolerability evaluation; all other patients were on a stable dose of ≥850 mg/d of metformin. The PK profile was assessed at 0 and 2 hours and at days 2, 14, 28, 56, 84, and 168. Changes in hsCRP and hemoglobin (Hb) A1c levels were assessed at weeks 4, 8, 12, and 24. FINDINGS: Of the 231 enrolled patients, 222 completed the study. Median hsCRP values at screening ranged from 1.8 to 3.2 mg/L, and the median daily dose of metformin ranged from 1000 to 2000 mg. Exposure to canakinumab was dose proportional. The mean half-life ranged from 17 to 26 days, and mean systemic clearance ranged from 0.094 to 0.128 mL/h/kg. Dose-related reductions in hsCRP were significantly greater with canakinumab compared with those with placebo at week 4 (-0.2 mg/L, -0.5 mg/L, -1.5 mg/L, and -1.7 mg/L with the 0.1-, 0.3-, 1.5-, and 10-mg/kg doses, respectively; all, P < 0.05). Significant reductions in hsCRP were maintained up to week 12 with the 2 highest doses of canakinumab (-0.8 mg/L with 1.5 mg/kg and -1.3 mg/L with 10 mg/kg; both, P < 0.05). A placebo-adjusted decrease in HbA1c of 0.31% at week 12 was reported with canakinumab 10 mg/kg (P = 0.038), and a reduction of 0.23% at week 4 was found with canakinumab 1.5 mg/kg (P = 0.011). IMPLICATIONS: The findings from this study suggest that IL-1ß blockade after single-dose administration of canakinumab at 1.5 and 10 mg/kg provided sustained suppression of hsCRP levels for 12 weeks in patients with T2DM. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00900146.

Safety and tolerability of canakinumab, an IL-1ß inhibitor, in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients: a pooled analysis of three randomised double-blind studies.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the safety and tolerability of different doses of canakinumab versus placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: Data were pooled from three studies in 1026 T2DM patients with different routes of administration, treatment regimens and follow-up duration. Canakinumab groups were categorised as low (0.03 mg/kg i.v. once; N = 20), intermediate (0.1 and 0.3 mg/kg i.v. once, 5 and 15 mg s.c. monthly; N = 247), medium (1.5 mg/kg i.v. once, 50 mg s.c. monthly and 150 mg s.c. once; N = 268), and high doses (10 mg/kg i.v. once and 150 mg s.c. monthly; N = 137) and compared with placebo (N = 354). Incidences of adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), discontinuations due to AEs, deaths, AEs of special interest related to interleukin-1ß inhibition and T2DM disease, and laboratory abnormalities related to haematology and biochemistry parameters were reported. Safety was also analysed by age (<65, ≥65) and gender. RESULTS: Average exposure across all groups was ≈ 6 months (maximum ~17 months). No dose response in AEs was observed but a trend towards more patients having at least one AE across canakinumab groups relative to placebo (P = 0.0152) was observed. SAEs were few and the incidence rate for most canakinumab groups was lower than that of placebo group except for the high-dose group (0.94% versus 0.58% per month in placebo). A total of five patients discontinued treatment due to AEs across treatment groups. No death was reported in any of the three studies. A small, non-significant increase in the incidence rate of infection AEs was observed on canakinumab groups relative to placebo. Canakinumab was associated with mostly mild decreases in WBC, neutrophils and platelet counts. Additionally, mild increases in SGPT, SGOT and bilirubin were reported. Overall, despite small differences, no clinically relevant findings were observed with respect to laboratory values and vital signs. CONCLUSIONS: This pooled analysis demonstrated that canakinumab was safe and well tolerated over a treatment period up to 1.4 years at the four pooled doses evaluated, in agreement with safety findings reported in the individual studies.

Effects of interleukin-1ß inhibition with canakinumab on hemoglobin A1c, lipids, C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and fibrinogen: a phase IIb randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: To test formally the inflammatory hypothesis of atherothrombosis, an agent is needed that reduces inflammatory biomarkers such as C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and fibrinogen but that does not have major effects on lipid pathways associated with disease progression. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a double-blind, multinational phase IIb trial of 556 men and women with well-controlled diabetes mellitus and high cardiovascular risk who were randomly allocated to subcutaneous placebo or to subcutaneous canakinumab at doses of 5, 15, 50, or 150 mg monthly and followed over 4 months. Compared with placebo, canakinumab had modest but nonsignificant effects on the change in hemoglobin A1c, glucose, and insulin levels. No effects were seen for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, or non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, although triglyceride levels increased ≈10% in the 50-mg (P=0.02) and 150-mg (P=0.03) groups. By contrast, the median reductions in C-reactive protein at 4 months were 36.4%, 53.0%, 64.6%, and 58.7% for the 5-, 15-, 50-, and 150-mg canakinumab doses, respectively, compared with 4.7% for placebo (all P values ≤0.02). Similarly, the median reductions in interleukin-6 at 4 months across the canakinumab dose range tested were 23.9%, 32.5%, 47.9%, and 44.5%, respectively, compared with 2.9% for placebo (all P≤0.008), and the median reductions in fibrinogen at 4 months were 4.9%, 11.7%, 18.5%, and 14.8%, respectively, compared with 0.4% for placebo (all P values ≤0.0001). Effects were observed in women and men. Clinical adverse events were similar in the canakinumab and placebo groups. CONCLUSIONS: Canakinumab, a human monoclonal antibody that neutralizes interleukin-1ß, significantly reduces inflammation without major effect on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol or high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. These phase II trial data support the use of canakinumab as a potential therapeutic method to test directly the inflammatory hypothesis of atherosclerosis.

Prandial inhaled insulin plus basal insulin glargine versus twice daily biaspart insulin for type 2 diabetes: a multicentre randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Insulin therapy is often a delayed strategy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus because it is associated with weight gain, hypoglycaemia, and the need for subcutaneous injections. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of prandial Technosphere inhaled insulin compared with twice daily biaspart insulin. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, parallel-group study, adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and poor glycaemic control despite insulin therapy, with or without oral antidiabetes drugs, were enrolled from ten countries between Feb 23, 2006, and Aug 8, 2007. Patients were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive 52 weeks' treatment with: prandial Technosphere inhaled insulin powder plus bedtime insulin glargine; or twice daily premixed biaspart insulin (70% insulin aspart protamine suspension and 30% insulin aspart of rDNA origin). The primary endpoint was a comparison of change in glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) from baseline to week 52 between treatment groups; the non-inferiority margin was 0.4%. Analysis was by per protocol for non-inferiority testing of the primary endpoint. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00309244. FINDINGS: 334 patients were allocated to inhaled insulin plus insulin glargine, and 343 to biaspart insulin; 107 patients on inhaled insulin plus insulin glargine and 85 on biaspart insulin discontinued the trial. 211 patients on inhaled insulin plus insulin glargine and 237 on biaspart insulin were included in per-protocol analyses. Change in HbA(1c) with inhaled insulin plus insulin glargine (-0.68%, SE 0.077, 95% CI -0.83 to -0.53) was similar and non-inferior to that with biaspart insulin (-0.76%, 0.071, -0.90 to -0.62). The between-group difference was 0.07% (SE 0.102, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.27). Patients had significantly lower weight gain and had fewer mild-to-moderate and severe hypoglycaemic events on inhaled insulin plus insulin glargine than on biaspart insulin. The safety and tolerability profile was similar for both treatments, apart from increased occurrence of cough and change in pulmonary function in the group receiving inhaled insulin plus insulin glargine. INTERPRETATION: This study is part of a large clinical development programme addressing the efficacy and tolerability of use of Technosphere inhaled insulin in a wide variety of patients. FUNDING: MannKind.

Evaluation of treatment satisfaction associated with the use of insulin aspart in continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare treatment satisfaction among people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes after switching from insulin lispro to insulin aspart in continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII). Efficacy of glycemic control between treatments was also investigated. METHODS: Subjects using CSII with insulin lispro for 6 months or longer continued this therapy over a 4-week period and then switched to insulin aspart in CSII for 12 weeks. The Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ) and Insulin Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (ITSQ) were administered immediately prior to the switch and again at the end of 12 weeks of therapy with insulin aspart. Hemoglobin A(1c)(A1C) and fasting blood glucose (FBG) levels, insulin dose, and body weight were recorded at the same time points. RESULTS: Although average overall DTSQ score did not change significantly, average overall ITSQ score was significantly improved following the insulin aspart treatment. There was a small but statistically significant reduction in mean A1C and FBG following 12 weeks of CSII using insulin aspart. CONCLUSIONS: Both insulin aspart and insulin lispro are appropriate for CSII. ITSQ improvements suggest that aspects of CSII therapy with insulin aspart positively impact treatment satisfaction.

A randomized trial comparing continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion of insulin aspart versus insulin lispro in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: The safety and efficacy of insulin aspart continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) was compared with that of insulin lispro CSII in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Children and adolescents aged 4-18 years with diagnosed type 1 diabetes >or=1 year previously and treated with insulin analog in a CSII >or=3 months were randomly assigned 2:1 to 16 weeks of insulin aspart CSII (n = 198) or insulin lispro CSII (n = 100) in this open-label, parallel-group, multicenter study. Standard diabetes safety and efficacy parameters were assessed. RESULTS: Baseline demographics, subject characteristics, and diabetes history were similar between treatment groups. After 16 weeks of treatment, insulin aspart CSII was noninferior to insulin lispro CSII as measured by change in A1C from baseline (aspart, -0.15 +/- 0.05%; lispro, -0.05 +/- 0.07% [95% CI of the treatment difference -0.27 to 0.07]; P = 0.241). No significant differences between treatment groups were observed in fasting plasma glucose, hyperglycemia, and rates of hypoglycemic episodes. At week 16, 59.7% of subjects in the aspart group and 43.8% of subjects in the lispro groups achieved age-specific American Diabetes Association A1C goals (<8.5% for subjects aged <6 years; <8% for subjects aged 6-18 years) (P = 0.040, corrected for baseline). Daily insulin dose (units per kilogram) was significantly lower at week 16 for subjects treated with aspart compared with those treated with lispro (0.86 +/- 0.237 vs. 0.94 +/- 0.233, P = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Insulin aspart was as safe and effective as insulin lispro for use in a CSII in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

Insulin growth factor-based dosing of growth hormone therapy in children: a randomized, controlled study.

CONTEXT: Weight-based dosing of GH is the standard of care for short children, although IGF-I is thought to be the main mediator of GH actions on growth. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to test whether IGF-I levels achieved during GH therapy are determinants of the growth responses to GH treatment. DESIGN: This was a 2-yr, open-label, randomized, IGF-I concentration-controlled trial. Prepubertal short children [n = 172, mean age 7.53 yr, mean height sd score (HT-SDS) -2.64] with low IGF-I levels (mean IGF-I SDS -3.56) were randomized to receive one of two GH dose-titration arms in which GH dosage was titrated to achieve an IGF-I SDS at the mean [IGF((low)) group, n = 70] or the upper limit of the normal range [+2 SDS, IGF((high)) group, n = 68] or to a comparison group of conventional GH dose of 40 microg/kg/d (n = 34). SETTING: The study was conducted in a multicenter, outpatient setting. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Change in HT-SDS over 2 yr was measured. RESULTS: One hundred forty-seven patients completed the trial. Target IGF-I levels were achieved in the dose-titration arms within 6-9 months. The changes in HT-SDS were +1.0, +1.1, and +1.6 for conventional, IGF((low)), and IGF((high)), respectively, with IGF((high)) showing significantly greater linear growth response (P < 0.001, compared with the other two groups). The IGF((high)) arm required higher doses (>2.5 times) than the IGF((low)) arm, and these GH doses were highly variable (20-346 microg/kg/d). Multivariate analyses suggested that the rise in the IGF-I SDS significantly impacted height outcome along with the GH dose and the pretreatment peak-stimulated GH level. CONCLUSION: IGF-I-based GH dosing is clinically feasible and allows maintaining serum IGF-I concentrations within the desired target range. Titrating the GH dose to achieve higher IGF-I targets results in improved growth responses, although at higher average GH doses.