Mortality burden of pre-treatment weight loss in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

Cachexia, with weight loss (WL) as a major component, is highly prevalent in patients with cancer and indicates a poor prognosis. The primary objective of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis to estimate the risk of mortality associated with cachexia (using established WL criteria prior to treatment initiation) in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in studies identified through a systematic literature review. The review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Embase® and PubMed were searched to identify articles on survival outcomes in adult patients with NSCLC (any stage) and cachexia published in English between 1 January 2016 and 10 October 2021. Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts and full texts of identified records against predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Following a feasibility assessment, a meta-analysis evaluating the impact of cachexia, defined per the international consensus criteria (ICC), or of pre-treatment WL ≥ 5% without a specified time interval, on overall survival in patients with NSCLC was conducted using a random-effects model that included the identified studies as the base case. The impact of heterogeneity was evaluated through sensitivity and subgroup analyses. The standard measures of statistical heterogeneity were calculated. Of the 40 NSCLC publications identified in the review, 20 studies that used the ICC for cachexia or reported WL ≥ 5% and that performed multivariate analyses with hazard ratios (HRs) or Kaplan-Meier curves were included in the feasibility assessment. Of these, 16 studies (80%; n = 6225 patients; published 2016-2021) met the criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis: 11 studies (69%) used the ICC and 5 studies (31%) used WL ≥ 5%. Combined criteria (ICC plus WL ≥ 5%) were associated with an 82% higher mortality risk versus no cachexia or WL < 5% (pooled HR [95% confidence interval, CI]: 1.82 [1.47, 2.25]). Although statistical heterogeneity was high (I2 = 88%), individual study HRs were directionally aligned with the pooled estimate, and there was considerable overlap in CIs across included studies. A subgroup analysis of studies using the ICC (HR [95% CI]: 2.26 [1.80, 2.83]) or WL ≥ 5% (HR [95% CI]: 1.28 [1.12, 1.46]) showed consistent findings. Assessments of methodological, clinical and statistical heterogeneity indicated that the meta-analysis was robust. Overall, this analysis found that ICC-defined cachexia or WL ≥ 5% was associated with inferior survival in patients with NSCLC. Routine assessment of both weight and weight changes in the oncology clinic may help identify patients with NSCLC at risk for worse survival, better inform clinical decision-making and assess eligibility for cachexia clinical trials.

Sex effects in predictors of smoking abstinence and neuropsychiatric adverse events in the EAGLES trial.

Significance There are sex effects in abstinence outcomes across all smoking cessation medications, but there is limited information regarding sex effects on cessation-related neuropsychiatric adverse events (NPSAEs) or interactions with psychiatric status. METHODS: Secondary analysis of data from EAGLES of 8144 adults who smoke cigarettes randomized to varenicline, bupropion, nicotine patch or placebo. Design characteristics included region (within/outside US), psychiatric cohort (absent/present), and treatment. Baseline variables included demographics, smoking history, prior use of study treatments, lifetime suicide-related history, and prior psychiatric co-morbidities and medication use. Design characteristics were forced into logistic regressions models, and then interactions among sex, design elements, and baseline characteristics were evaluated for NPSAEs and 6-month cessation outcomes. RESULTS: Findings demonstrated a significant interaction of sex and race (p < 0.02); Black women were more likely to report NPSAEs than Black men. For cessation outcomes, there were no significant interactions with psychiatric cohort and sex. Women vs men with higher baseline levels of smoking had lower odds of continuous abstinence. Women vs men who used varenicline previously had lower odds of continuous abstinence. For 6-month point prevalence, sex interacted with baseline cigarettes per day (p < 0.01) similar to the interaction for continuous abstinence. Sex interacted with medication (p < 0.03), such that women vs men had relatively greater success at achieving point prevalence abstinence on varenicline. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, results demonstrated important sex and racial differences in the incidence of NPSAEs, but psychiatric status did not interact with sex on cessation outcomes. Findings did support prior work demonstrating relative increased efficacy of varenicline for women.

Population pharmacokinetics and exposure-response analyses of varenicline in adolescent smokers.

Varenicline is an approved smoking cessation aid in adults. Population pharmacokinetics (popPK) and exposure-response (ER) (continuous abstinence rates [CAR] weeks 9-12 and nausea/vomiting incidence) for varenicline in adolescent smokers were characterized using data from two phase 1 and one phase 4 studies. A one-compartment popPK model with first-order absorption and elimination adequately fitted the observed data. The effect of female sex on apparent clearance was significant. Apparent volume of distribution increased with body weight and decreased by 24%, 15%, and 14% for black race, "other" race, and female sex, respectively. The observed range of exposure in the phase 4 study was consistent with that expected for each dose and body-weight group from the results obtained in adolescent PK studies, supporting that varenicline dose and administration were appropriate in the study. The relationship between CAR9-12 and varenicline area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) from 0 to 24 hours (AUC24 ) was nonsignificant (p = 0.303). Nausea/vomiting incidence increased with AUC24 (p < 0.001) and was higher in females. Varenicline PK and ER for tolerability in adolescent smokers were comparable with adults, while ER for efficacy confirmed the negative results reported in the phase 4 study.

Estimation of risk of neuropsychiatric adverse events from varenicline, bupropion and nicotine patch versus placebo: secondary analysis of results from the EAGLES trial using Bayes factors.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Analysed using classical frequentist hypothesis testing with alpha set to 0.05, the Evaluating Adverse Events in a Global Smoking Cessation Study (EAGLES) did not find enough evidence to reject the hypothesis of no difference in neuropsychiatric adverse events (NPSAEs) attributable to varenicline, bupropion, or nicotine patch compared with placebo. This might be because the null hypothesis was true or because the data were insensitive. The present study aimed to test the hypothesis more directly using Bayes factors. DESIGN: EAGLES was a randomised, double-blind, triple-dummy, controlled trial. SETTING: Global (16 countries across five continents), between November 2011 and January 2015. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were smokers with (n = 4116) and without (n = 4028) psychiatric disorders. INTERVENTIONS: Varenicline (1 mg twice daily), bupropion (150 mg twice daily), nicotine patch (21 mg once daily with taper) and matched placebos. MEASUREMENTS: The outcomes included: (i) a composite measure of moderate/severe NPSAEs; and (ii) a composite measure of severe NPSAEs. The relative evidence for there being no difference in NPSAEs versus data insensitivity for the medications was calculated in the full and sub-samples using Bayes factors and corresponding robustness regions. FINDINGS: For all but two comparisons, Bayes factors were <1/3, indicating moderate to strong evidence for no difference in risk of NPSAEs between active medications and placebo (Bayes factor = 0.02-0.23). In the psychiatric cohort versus placebo, the data were suggestive, but not conclusive of no increase in NPSAEs with varenicline (Bayes factor = 0.52) and bupropion (Bayes factor = 0.71). Here, the robustness regions ruled out a ≥7% and ≥8% risk increase with varenicline and bupropion, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Secondary analysis of the Evaluating Adverse Events in a Global Smoking Cessation Study trial using Bayes factors provides moderate to strong evidence that use of varenicline, bupropion or nicotine patches for smoking cessation does not increase the risk of neuropsychiatric adverse events relative to use of placebo in smokers without a history of psychiatric disorder. For smokers with a history of psychiatric disorder the evidence also points to no increased risk but with less confidence.

Efficacy and Safety of Pharmacotherapeutic Smoking Cessation Aids in Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders: Subgroup Analysis of EAGLES.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of varenicline, bupropion, and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) among smokers with schizophrenia spectrum disorders in post hoc analyses of Evaluating Adverse Events in a Global Smoking Cessation Study data. METHODS: Smokers with schizophrenia spectrum disorder (N=390) and without a psychiatric illness (control group, N=4,028) were randomly assigned to receive varenicline, bupropion, NRT patch, or placebo for 12 weeks. Outcomes included abstinence rates during treatment and follow-up, number needed to treat (NNT) for abstinence, incidence of neuropsychiatric adverse events (NPSAEs), and temporal relationship between NPSAEs and abstinence status. RESULTS: Smokers with schizophrenia smoked more and had greater dependence and fewer prior trials of cessation pharmacotherapy at baseline. At each time point, smokers with schizophrenia assigned to varenicline had significantly greater odds of abstinence compared with their matched placebo group, with NNT comparable to the control group. Bupropion and NRT increased odds of abstinence; confidence intervals (CIs) included 1 for some comparisons, and NNT for smokers with schizophrenia was greater than for the control group. No treatment was associated with significantly more NPSAEs, compared with placebo, in either cohort. The estimated NPSAE rate was 5% (95% CI=3.0-7.7) for smokers with schizophrenia and 1% (95% CI=0.6-2.1) for the control group. Over one-third of NPSAEs occurred during partial or full abstinence, suggesting a multifactorial nature. CONCLUSIONS: For smokers with schizophrenia, varenicline led to significantly higher abstinence rates, and NNT was comparable to the control group. A significant proportion of NPSAEs occurred during early abstinence. No treatment significantly increased NPSAE prevalence.

High-dose and low-dose varenicline for smoking cessation in adolescents: a randomised, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although cigarette smoking typically begins in adolescence, evidence for successful pharmacological smoking cessation interventions for this population is scarce. In adult smokers, varenicline is the most effective single pharmacotherapy. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of varenicline for smoking cessation in adolescents. METHODS: We did a randomised, placebo-controlled trial with adolescent smokers aged 12-19 years who were seeking treatment to quit at 57 outpatient centres (in the USA, Russia, South Korea, Taiwan, Canada, and Georgia). Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive 12 weeks of high-dose varenicline (1 mg twice daily; 0·5 mg twice daily if bodyweight ≤55 kg), low-dose varenicline (0·5 mg twice daily; 0·5 mg once daily if bodyweight ≤55 kg), or placebo, then followed up for 40 additional weeks. At all visits, participants received brief, developmentally tailored smoking cessation counselling (<10 min per session) delivered by a trained counsellor. The primary efficacy outcome was continuous abstinence from weeks 9 to 12, measured via a Nicotine Use Inventory and confirmed by urine cotinine testing. The primary tolerability outcome was frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events, including neuropsychiatric adverse events, occurring after the first dose and within 30 days of the last dose of study medication. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01312909. FINDINGS: Between April 26, 2011, and Jan 18, 2018, 312 participants were enrolled and completed participation in the study: 109 in the high-dose varenicline group, 103 in the low-dose varenicline group, and 100 in the placebo group. The continuous abstinence rates from week 9 to 12 were 20% (22 of 109) in the high-dose varenicline group, 27% (28 of 103) in the low-dose varenicline group, and 18% (18 of 100) in the placebo group. Abstinence rates between high-dose varenicline and placebo groups (odds ratio [OR] 1·18 [95% CI 0·59-2·37]; p=0·63) and between low-dose varenicline and placebo groups (1·73 [0·88-3·39]; p=0·11) did not differ significantly. Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 65 (60%) of 108 participants in the high-dose group, 53 (53%) of 100 in the low-dose group, and 52 (53%) of 99 in the placebo group, and most were rated as mild. Neuropsychiatric treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 18 (17%) of 108 participants in the high-dose group, 11 (11%) of 100 in the low-dose group, and 12 (12%) of 99 in the placebo group, and none was rated as severe. INTERPRETATION: This trial did not show an advantage in abstinence with varenicline compared with placebo among adolescent smokers. The rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were similar to those in previous trials of adult smokers, raising no new tolerability signals. These findings do not support the use of varenicline as a first-line pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation in adolescents. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Varenicline: mode of action, efficacy, safety and accumulated experience salient for clinical populations.

Objective: Varenicline, a selective partial agonist of the α4ß2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor, is a smoking cessation pharmacotherapy that more than doubles the chance of quitting smoking at 6 months compared with placebo. This article reviews salient knowledge of the discovery, pharmacological characteristics, and the efficacy and safety of varenicline in general and in specific populations of smokers and provides recommendations to support use in clinical practice.Methods: Literature searches for varenicline were conducted using PubMed, with date limitations of 2000-2018 inclusive, using search terms covering the discovery, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety in different populations of smokers, alternative quit approaches and combination therapy. Selection of safety and efficacy data was limited to clinical trials, meta-analyses and observational studies.Results: Standard administration of varenicline is efficacious in helping smokers to quit, including smokers with cardiovascular disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Furthermore, varenicline efficacy may be improved with pre-loading, a gradual quitting approach for smokers unwilling or unable to quit abruptly, and extended treatment in smokers who have recently quit to help maintain abstinence. Initial concerns regarding the association of varenicline with increased risk of neuropsychiatric and cardiovascular adverse events have been disproven after extensive clinical evaluations, and the benefit-risk profile of varenicline is considered favorable.Conclusions: Varenicline is efficacious and safe for all adult smokers with a range of clinical characteristics. Evidence suggests that approaches offering greater flexibility in timing and duration of treatment may further extend treatment efficacy and clinical reach.

Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapies for smoking cessation in anxiety disorders: Subgroup analysis of the randomized, active- and placebo-controlled EAGLES trial.

BACKGROUND: Smoking rates are high in adults with anxiety disorders (ADs), yet little is known about the safety and efficacy of smoking-cessation pharmacotherapies in this group. METHODS: Post hoc analyses in 712 smokers with AD (posttraumatic stress disorder [PTSD], n = 192; generalized anxiety disorder [GAD], n = 243; panic disorder [PD], n = 277) and in a nonpsychiatric cohort (NPC; n = 4,028). Participants were randomly assigned to varenicline, bupropion, nicotine-replacement therapy (NRT), or placebo plus weekly smoking-cessation counseling for 12 weeks, with 12 weeks follow-up. General linear models were used to test the effects of treatment group, cohort, and their interaction on neuropsychiatric adverse events (NPSAEs), and continuous abstinence weeks 9-12 (treatment) and 9-24 (follow-up). RESULTS: NPSAE incidence for PTSD (6.9%), GAD (5.4%), and PD (6.2%) was higher versus NPC (2.1%), regardless of treatment. Across all treatments, smokers with PTSD (odds ratio [OR] = 0.58), GAD (OR = 0.72), and PD (OR = 0.53) had lower continuous abstinence rates weeks 9-12 (CAR9-12) versus NPC. Varenicline demonstrated superior efficacy to placebo in smokers with GAD and PD, respectively (OR = 4.53; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.20-17.10; and OR = 8.49; 95% CI = 1.57-45.78); NRT was superior to placebo in smokers with PD (OR = 7.42; 95% CI = 1.37-40.35). While there was no statistically significant effect of any treatment on CAR9-12 for smokers with PTSD, varenicline improved 7-day point prevalence abstinence at end of treatment in this subcohort. CONCLUSION: Individuals with ADs were more likely than those without psychiatric illness to experience moderate to severe NPSAEs during smoking-cessation attempts, regardless of treatment. While the study was not powered to evaluate abstinence outcomes with these subgroups of smokers with ADs, varenicline provided significant benefit for cessation in those with GAD and PD, while NRT provided significant benefit for those with PD.

Safety and efficacy of first-line smoking cessation pharmacotherapies in bipolar disorders: Subgroup analysis of a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: Post hoc analyses of EAGLES data to examine safety and efficacy of first-line smoking cessation pharmacotherapies in smokers with bipolar disorders (BD). METHODS: Smokers with BD I/II (n = 285; 81.4% with BD I) and a comparison nonpsychiatric cohort (NPC; n = 2794) were randomly assigned to varenicline, bupropion, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), or placebo for 12 weeks, plus weekly counseling. Primary outcomes were occurrence of moderate to severe neuropsychiatric adverse events (NPSAEs) and Weeks 9-12 biochemically-confirmed continuous abstinence (CA) rates. RESULTS: For BD smokers, NPSAE risk differences versus placebo were: varenicline, 6.17 (95% CI: -7.84 to 20.18); bupropion, 4.09 (-8.82 to 16.99); NRT, -0.56 (-12.34 to 11.22). ORs for Weeks 9-12 CA, comparing active medication to placebo among BD smokers were: varenicline, 2.61 (0.68-9.95); bupropion, 1.29 (0.31-5.37), NRT, 0.71 (0.14-3.74). Pooling across treatments, NPSAE occurrence was higher (10.7% versus 2.3%; P < 0.001) and CA rates were lower (22.8% versus 13.3%; P = 0.008) in BD than NPC. LIMITATIONS: Study not powered to detect differences in safety and efficacy in the BD subcohort; generalizability limited to stably treated BD without current substance use disorders. CONCLUSIONS: Smokers with BD had higher risk of NPSAEs and were less likely to quit overall than NPC smokers. Among smokers with BD, NPSAE risk difference estimates for active treatments versus placebo ranged from 1% lower to 6% higher. Efficacy of varenicline in smokers with BD was similar to EAGLES main outcomes; bupropion and NRT effect sizes were descriptively lower. Varenicline may be a tolerable and effective cessation treatment for smokers with BD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (https://clinicaltrials.gov/): NCT01456936.

Improved Outcomes Associated with the use of Shock Protocols: Updates from the National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative.

BACKGROUND: The National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative is a single-arm, prospective, multicenter study to assess outcomes associated with early mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock (AMICS) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: Between July 2016 and February 2019, 35 sites participated and enrolled into the study. All centers agreed to treat patients with AMICS using a standard protocol emphasizing invasive hemodynamic monitoring and rapid initiation of MCS. Inclusion and exclusion criteria mimicked those of the "SHOCK" trial with an additional exclusion criteria of intra-aortic balloon pump counter-pulsation prior to MCS. RESULTS: A total of 171 consecutive patients were enrolled. Patients had an average age of 63 years, 77% were male, and 68% were admitted with AMICS. About 83% of patients were on vasopressors or inotropes, 20% had a witnessed out of hospital cardiac arrest, 29% had in-hospital cardiac arrest, and 10% were under active cardiopulmonary resuscitation during MCS implantation. In accordance with the protocol, 74% of patients had MCS implanted prior to PCI. Right heart catheterization was performed in 92%. About 78% of patients presented with ST-elevation myocardial infarction with average door to support times of 85 ± 63 min and door to balloon times of 87 ± 58 min. Survival to discharge was 72%. Creatinine ≥2, lactate >4, cardiac power output (CPO) <0.6 W, and age ≥ 70 years were predictors of mortality. Lactate and CPO measurements at 12-24 hr reliably predicted overall mortality postindex procedure. CONCLUSION: In contemporary practice, use of a shock protocol emphasizing best practices is associated with improved outcomes.

Predictors of Neuropsychiatric Adverse Events with Smoking Cessation Medications in the Randomized Controlled EAGLES Trial.

BACKGROUND: Pre-treatment factors that increase smokers' risk of experiencing neuropsychiatric adverse events (NPSAEs) when quitting smoking are unknown. OBJECTIVE: To identify baseline smoker characteristics beyond the history of mental illness that predict which participants were more likely to experience moderate to severe NPSAEs in EAGLES. DESIGN: A prospective correlational cohort study in the context of a multinational, multicenter, double-blind, randomized trial. PARTICIPANTS: Smokers without (N = 3984; NPC)/with (N = 4050; PC) histories of, or current clinically stable, psychiatric disorders including mood (N = 2882; 71%), anxiety (N = 782; 19%), and psychotic (N = 386; 10%) disorders. INTERVENTIONS: Bupropion, 150 mg twice daily, or varenicline, 1 mg twice daily, versus active control (nicotine patch, 21 mg/day with taper) and placebo for 12 weeks with 12-week non-treatment follow-up. MAIN MEASURES: Primary safety outcome was the incidence of a composite measure of moderate/severe NPSAEs. Associations among baseline demographic/clinical characteristics and the primary safety endpoint were analyzed post hoc via generalized linear regression. KEY RESULTS: The incidence of moderate to severe NPSAEs was higher among smokers in the PC (238/4050; 5.9%) than in the NPC (84/3984; 2.1%). Three baseline characteristics predicted increased risk for experiencing clinically significant NPSAEs when quitting regardless of carrying a psychiatric diagnosis: current symptoms of anxiety (for every ~ 4-unit increase in HADS anxiety score, the absolute risk of occurrence of the NPSAE endpoint increased by 1% in both PC and NPC); prior history of suicidal ideation and/or behavior (PC, 4.4% increase; P = 0.001; NPC, 4.1% increase; P = 0.02), and being of White race (versus Black: PC, 2.9% ± 0.9 [SE] increase; P = 0.002; and NPC, 3.4% ± 0.8 [SE] increase; P = 0.001). Among smokers with psychiatric disorders, younger age, female sex, history of substance use disorders, and proxy measures of nicotine dependence or psychiatric illness severity also predicted greater risk. There were no significant interactions between these characteristics and treatment. Smokers with unstable psychiatric disorders or with current, active substance abuse were excluded from the study. CONCLUSIONS: Irrespective of cessation pharmacotherapy use, smokers attempting to quit were more likely to experience moderate to severe NPSAEs if they reported current anxiety or prior suicidal ideation at baseline and were White. In smokers with a psychiatric history, female sex, younger age, and greater severity of nicotine dependence were also predictive. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01456936.

Neuropsychiatric Safety and Efficacy of Varenicline, Bupropion, and Nicotine Patch in Smokers With Psychotic, Anxiety, and Mood Disorders in the EAGLES Trial.

BACKGROUND: Neuropsychiatric safety and relative efficacy of varenicline, bupropion, and transdermal nicotine patch (NRT) in those with psychiatric disorders are of interest. METHODS: We performed secondary analyses of safety and efficacy outcomes by psychiatric diagnosis in EAGLES (Evaluating Adverse Events in a Global Smoking Cessation Study), a 12-week, randomized, double-blind, triple-dummy, placebo- and active (NRT)-controlled trial of varenicline and bupropion with 12-week follow-up, in a subset population, n = 4092, with a primary psychotic (n = 390), anxiety (n = 792), or mood (n = 2910) disorder. Primary end-point parameters were incidence of prespecified moderate and severe neuropsychiatric adverse events (NPSAEs) and weeks 9 to 12 continuous abstinence rates (9-12CAR). RESULTS: The observed NPSAE incidence across treatments was 5.1% to 6.3% in those with a psychotic disorder, 4.6% to 8.0% in those with an anxiety disorder, and 4.6% to 6.8% in those with a mood disorder. Neither varenicline nor bupropion was associated with significantly increased NPSAEs relative to NRT or placebo in the psychiatric cohort or any psychiatric diagnostic subcohort. There was a significant effect of treatment on 9-12CAR (P < 0.0001) and no significant treatment-by-diagnostic subcohort interaction (P = 0.24). Abstinence rates with varenicline were superior to bupropion, NRT, and placebo, and abstinence with bupropion and NRT was superior to placebo. Within-diagnostic subcohort comparisons of treatment efficacy yielded estimated odds ratios for 9-12CAR versus placebo of greater than 3.00 for varenicline, greater than 1.90 for bupropion, and greater than 1.80 for NRT for all diagnostic groups. CONCLUSIONS: Varenicline, bupropion, and nicotine patch are well tolerated and effective in adults with psychotic, anxiety, and mood disorders. The relative effectiveness of varenicline, bupropion, and NRT versus placebo did not vary across psychiatric diagnoses.

Cardiovascular Safety of Varenicline, Bupropion, and Nicotine Patch in Smokers: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Quitting smoking is enhanced by the use of pharmacotherapies, but concerns have been raised regarding the cardiovascular safety of such medications. Objective: To compare the relative cardiovascular safety risk of smoking cessation treatments. Design, Setting, and Participants: A double-blind, randomized, triple-dummy, placebo- and active-controlled trial (Evaluating Adverse Events in a Global Smoking Cessation Study [EAGLES]) and its nontreatment extension trial was conducted at 140 multinational centers. Smokers, with or without established psychiatric diagnoses, who received at least 1 dose of study medication (n = 8058), as well as a subset of those who completed 12 weeks of treatment plus 12 weeks of follow up and agreed to be followed up for an additional 28 weeks (n = 4595), were included. Interventions: Varenicline, 1 mg twice daily; bupropion hydrochloride, 150 mg twice daily; and nicotine replacement therapy, 21-mg/d patch with tapering. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the time to development of a major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE: cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke) during treatment; secondary end points were the occurrence of MACE and other pertinent cardiovascular events (MACE+: MACE or new-onset or worsening peripheral vascular disease requiring intervention, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for unstable angina). Results: Of the 8058 participants, 3553 (44.1%) were male (mean [SD] age, 46.5 [12.3] years). The incidence of cardiovascular events during treatment and follow-up was low (<0.5% for MACE; <0.8% for MACE+) and did not differ significantly by treatment. No significant treatment differences were observed in time to cardiovascular events, blood pressure, or heart rate. There was no significant difference in time to onset of MACE for either varenicline or bupropion treatment vs placebo (varenicline: hazard ratio, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.05-1.68 and bupropion: hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.10-2.50). Conclusions and Relevance: No evidence that the use of smoking cessation pharmacotherapies increased the risk of serious cardiovascular adverse events during or after treatment was observed. The findings of EAGLES and its extension trial provide further evidence that smoking cessation medications do not increase the risk of serious cardiovascular events in the general population of smokers. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01574703.

Factors associated with the efficacy of smoking cessation treatments and predictors of smoking abstinence in EAGLES.

AIMS: To assess (1) how far the efficacies of front-line smoking cessation pharmacotherapies vary as a function of smoker characteristics and (2) associations between these characteristics and success of smoking cessation attempts. DESIGN: Prospective correlational study in the context of a double-blind randomized trial. The outcome was regressed individually onto each covariate after adjusting for treatment, and then a forward stepwise model constructed. Treatment moderator effects of covariates were tested by treatment × covariate interactions. SETTING: Health service facilities in multiple countries. PARTICIPANTS: Data came from 8120 smokers willing to make a quit attempt, randomized to varenicline, bupropion, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) or placebo in Evaluating Adverse Events in a Global Smoking Cessation Study (EAGLES) between 30 November 2011 and 13 January 2015. MEASUREMENTS: Smoker characteristics measured at baseline were country, psychiatric history, sex, age, body mass index (BMI), ethnic group, life-time suicidal ideation/behaviour, anxiety, depression, aggression, psychotropic medication, history of alcohol/substance use disorder, age of starting smoking, cigarette dependence [Fagerström Test for Cigarette Dependence (FTCD)] and prior use of study medicines. Outcome was biochemically confirmed continuous abstinence at weeks 9-24 from start of treatment. FINDINGS: No statistically significant treatment × covariate interactions were found. Odds of success were associated independently positively with age [odds ratio (OR) = 1.01; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.00, 1.01], BMI (1.01; 95% CI = 1.00, 1.02) and age of starting smoking (1.03; 95% CI = 1.02, 1.04). Odds were associated independently negatively with US (versus non-US) study site (0.53; 95% CI = 0.46, 0.61), black (versus white) ethnic group (0.57; 95% CI = 0.45, 0.72), mood disorder (0.85; 95% CI = 0.73, 0.99), anxiety disorder (0.71; 95% CI = 0.55, 0.90) and psychotic disorder (0.73; 95% CI = 0.50, 1.07), taking psychotropic medication (0.81; 95% CI = 0.68, 0.95), FTCD (0.89; 95% CI = 0.87, 0.92) and previous use of NRT (0.78; 95% CI = 0.67, 0.91). CONCLUSIONS: While a range of smoker characteristics-including psychiatric history, cigarette dependence and prior use of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT)-are associated with lower cessation rates, they do not substantially influence the efficacy of varenicline, bupropion or NRT.

Long-term safety and tolerability of bapineuzumab in patients with Alzheimer's disease in two phase 3 extension studies.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy with monoclonal antibodies that target amyloid beta has been under investigation as a treatment for patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). The 3000 and 3001 phase 3 clinical studies of intravenous bapineuzumab assessed safety and efficacy in patients with mild to moderate AD recruited in over 26 countries. This article describes the long-term safety and tolerability of bapineuzumab in the extension studies for these two protocols. METHODS: The long-term safety and tolerability of intravenous-administered bapineuzumab in patients with AD was evaluated in apolipoprotein E ε4 allele noncarriers (Study 3002, extension of Study 3000) and apolipoprotein E ε4 allele carriers (Study 3003, extension of Study 3001). Those receiving bapineuzumab in the parent study were continued at the same dose; if receiving placebo, patients began bapineuzumab. Bapineuzumab doses were 0.5 mg/kg in both studies and also 1.0 mg/kg in the noncarrier study. Clinical efficacy of bapineuzumab was also assessed in exploratory analyses. RESULTS: Because of lack of efficacy in two other phase 3 trials, the parent protocols were stopped early. As a result, Studies 3002 and 3003 were also terminated. In total, 492 and 202 patients were enrolled in Studies 3003 and 3002, respectively. In apolipoprotein E ε4 carriers (Study 3003), treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 70.7% of the patients who originally received placebo and 66.9% of those who originally received bapineuzumab. In noncarriers, treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 82.1% and 67.6% of patients who received placebo + bapineuzumab 0.5 mg/kg and placebo + bapineuzumab 1.0 mg/kg, respectively, and in 72.7% and 64.3% of those who received bapineuzumab + bapineuzumab 0.5 mg/kg and 1.0 mg/kg, respectively. Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities with edema or effusions were the main bapineuzumab-associated adverse events in both studies, occurring in approximately 11% of placebo + bapineuzumab and 4% of bapineuzumab + bapineuzumab groups overall. Exploratory analyses of clinical efficacy were not significantly different between groups in either study. CONCLUSIONS: In these phase 3 extension studies, intravenous bapineuzumab administered for up to approximately 3 years showed no unexpected safety signals and a safety profile consistent with previous bapineuzumab trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Noncarriers (Study 3002): ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00996918 . Registered 14 October 2009. Carriers (Study 3003): ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00998764 . Registered 16 October 2009.

Neuropsychiatric safety and efficacy of varenicline, bupropion, and nicotine patch in smokers with and without psychiatric disorders (EAGLES): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Substantial concerns have been raised about the neuropsychiatric safety of the smoking cessation medications varenicline and bupropion. Their efficacy relative to nicotine patch largely relies on indirect comparisons, and there is limited information on safety and efficacy in smokers with psychiatric disorders. We compared the relative neuropsychiatric safety risk and efficacy of varenicline and bupropion with nicotine patch and placebo in smokers with and without psychiatric disorders. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, triple-dummy, placebo-controlled and active-controlled (nicotine patch; 21 mg per day with taper) trial of varenicline (1 mg twice a day) and bupropion (150 mg twice a day) for 12 weeks with 12-week non-treatment follow-up done at 140 centres (clinical trial centres, academic centres, and outpatient clinics) in 16 countries between Nov 30, 2011, and Jan 13, 2015. Participants were motivated-to-quit smokers with and without psychiatric disorders who received brief cessation counselling at each visit. Randomisation was computer generated (1:1:1:1 ratio). Participants, investigators, and research personnel were masked to treatment assignments. The primary endpoint was the incidence of a composite measure of moderate and severe neuropsychiatric adverse events. The main efficacy endpoint was biochemically confirmed continuous abstinence for weeks 9-12. All participants randomly assigned were included in the efficacy analysis and those who received treatment were included in the safety analysis. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT01456936) and is now closed. FINDINGS: 8144 participants were randomly assigned, 4116 to the psychiatric cohort (4074 included in the safety analysis) and 4028 to the non-psychiatric cohort (3984 included in the safety analysis). In the non-psychiatric cohort, 13 (1·3%) of 990 participants reported moderate and severe neuropsychiatric adverse events in the varenicline group, 22 (2·2%) of 989 in the bupropion group, 25 (2·5%) of 1006 in the nicotine patch group, and 24 (2·4%) of 999 in the placebo group. The varenicline-placebo and bupropion-placebo risk differences (RDs) for moderate and severe neuropsychiatric adverse events were -1·28 (95% CI -2·40 to -0·15) and -0·08 (-1·37 to 1·21), respectively; the RDs for comparisons with nicotine patch were -1·07 (-2·21 to 0·08) and 0·13 (-1·19 to 1·45), respectively. In the psychiatric cohort, moderate and severe neuropsychiatric adverse events were reported in 67 (6·5%) of 1026 participants in the varenicline group, 68 (6·7%) of 1017 in the bupropion group, 53 (5·2%) of 1016 in the nicotine patch group, and 50 (4·9%) of 1015 in the placebo group. The varenicline-placebo and bupropion-placebo RDs were 1·59 (95% CI -0·42 to 3·59) and 1·78 (-0·24 to 3·81), respectively; the RDs versus nicotine patch were 1·22 (-0·81 to 3·25) and 1·42 (-0·63 to 3·46), respectively. Varenicline-treated participants achieved higher abstinence rates than those on placebo (odds ratio [OR] 3·61, 95% CI 3·07 to 4·24), nicotine patch (1·68, 1·46 to 1·93), and bupropion (1·75, 1·52 to 2·01). Those on bupropion and nicotine patch achieved higher abstinence rates than those on placebo (OR 2·07 [1·75 to 2·45] and 2·15 [1·82 to 2·54], respectively). Across cohorts, the most frequent adverse events by treatment group were nausea (varenicline, 25% [511 of 2016 participants]), insomnia (bupropion, 12% [245 of 2006 participants]), abnormal dreams (nicotine patch, 12% [251 of 2022 participants]), and headache (placebo, 10% [199 of 2014 participants]). Efficacy treatment comparison did not differ by cohort. INTERPRETATION: The study did not show a significant increase in neuropsychiatric adverse events attributable to varenicline or bupropion relative to nicotine patch or placebo. Varenicline was more effective than placebo, nicotine patch, and bupropion in helping smokers achieve abstinence, whereas bupropion and nicotine patch were more effective than placebo. FUNDING: Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline.

Effect of varenicline on smoking cessation through smoking reduction: a randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE: Some cigarette smokers may not be ready to quit immediately but may be willing to reduce cigarette consumption with the goal of quitting. OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy and safety of varenicline for increasing smoking abstinence rates through smoking reduction. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational clinical trial with a 24-week treatment period and 28-week follow-up conducted between July 2011 and July 2013 at 61 centers in 10 countries. The 1510 participants were cigarette smokers who were not willing or able to quit smoking within the next month but willing to reduce smoking and make a quit attempt within the next 3 months. Participants were recruited through advertising. INTERVENTIONS: Twenty-four weeks of varenicline titrated to 1 mg twice daily or placebo with a reduction target of 50% or more in number of cigarettes smoked by 4 weeks, 75% or more by 8 weeks, and a quit attempt by 12 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary efficacy end point was carbon monoxide-confirmed self-reported abstinence during weeks 15 through 24. Secondary outcomes were carbon monoxide-confirmed self-reported abstinence for weeks 21 through 24 and weeks 21 through 52. RESULTS: The varenicline group (n = 760) had significantly higher continuous abstinence rates during weeks 15 through 24 vs the placebo group (n = 750) (32.1% for the varenicline group vs 6.9% for the placebo group; risk difference (RD), 25.2% [95% CI, 21.4%-29.0%]; relative risk (RR), 4.6 [95% CI, 3.5-6.1]). The varenicline group had significantly higher continuous abstinence rates vs the placebo group during weeks 21 through 24 (37.8% for the varenicline group vs 12.5% for the placebo group; RD, 25.2% [95% CI, 21.1%-29.4%]; RR, 3.0 [95% CI, 2.4-3.7]) and weeks 21 through 52 (27.0% for the varenicline group vs 9.9% for the placebo group; RD, 17.1% [95% CI, 13.3%-20.9%]; RR, 2.7 [95% CI, 2.1-3.5]). Serious adverse events occurred in 3.7% of the varenicline group and 2.2% of the placebo group (P = .07). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among cigarette smokers not willing or able to quit within the next month but willing to reduce cigarette consumption and make a quit attempt at 3 months, use of varenicline for 24 weeks compared with placebo significantly increased smoking cessation rates at the end of treatment, and also at 1 year. Varenicline offers a treatment option for smokers whose needs are not addressed by clinical guidelines recommending abrupt smoking cessation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01370356.

Use of the numerator relationship matrix in genetic analysis of autopolyploid species.

Mixed models incorporating the inverse of a numerator relationship matrix (NRM) are widely used to estimate genetic parameters and to predict breeding values in animal breeding. A simple and quick method to directly calculate the inverse of the NRM has been historically developed for diploid animal species. Mixed models are less used in plant breeding partly because the existing method for diploids is not applicable to autopolyploid species. This is because of the phenomenon of double reduction and the possibility that gametes carry alleles which are identical by descent. This paper generalises the NRM and its inverse for autopolyploid species, so it can be easily incorporated into their genetic analysis. The technique proposed is to first calculate the kinship coefficient matrix and its inverse as a precursor to calculating the NRM and its inverse. This allows the NRM to be calculated for populations containing individuals of mixed ploidy levels. This generalization can also accommodate uncertain parentage by generating the "average" relationship matrix. The possibility that non-inbred parents can produce inbred progeny (double reduction) is also discussed. Rules are outlined that are applicable for any level of ploidy. Examples of use of the matrix are provided using simulated pedigrees.

Donepezil for treatment of cognitive dysfunction in children with Down syndrome aged 10-17.

The objective of this 10-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter study was to assess the efficacy and safety of donepezil for the treatment of cognitive dysfunction exhibited by children with Down syndrome (DS). Intervention comprised donepezil (2.5-10 mg/day) in children (aged 10-17 years) with DS of mild-to-moderate severity. The primary measures were the Vineland-II Adaptive Behavior Scales (VABS-II) Parent/Caregiver Rating Form (PCRF) the sum of nine subdomain standardized scores and standard safety measures. Secondary measures included the VABS-II/PCRF scores on the following domains and their respective individual subdomains: Communication (receptive, expressive, and written); Daily Living Skills (personal, domestic, and community); Socialization (interpersonal relationships, play and leisure time, and coping skills), and scores on the Test of Verbal Expression and Reasoning, a subject-performance-based measure of expressive language. At baseline, 129 participants were assigned treatment with donepezil or placebo. During the double-blind phase, VABS II/PCRF sum of the nine subdomain standardized scores, called v-scores, improved significantly from baseline in both groups (P < 0.0001), with no significant between-group differences. This trial failed to demonstrate any benefit for donepezil versus placebo in children and adolescents with DS, although donepezil appeared to be well tolerated.