Survival analysis for AdVerse events with VarYing follow-up times (SAVVY)-estimation of adverse event risks.

BACKGROUND: The SAVVY project aims to improve the analyses of adverse events (AEs), whether prespecified or emerging, in clinical trials through the use of survival techniques appropriately dealing with varying follow-up times and competing events (CEs). Although statistical methodologies have advanced, in AE analyses, often the incidence proportion, the incidence density, or a non-parametric Kaplan-Meier estimator are used, which ignore either censoring or CEs. In an empirical study including randomized clinical trials from several sponsor organizations, these potential sources of bias are investigated. The main purpose is to compare the estimators that are typically used to quantify AE risk within trial arms to the non-parametric Aalen-Johansen estimator as the gold-standard for estimating cumulative AE probabilities. A follow-up paper will consider consequences when comparing safety between treatment groups. METHODS: Estimators are compared with descriptive statistics, graphical displays, and a more formal assessment using a random effects meta-analysis. The influence of different factors on the size of deviations from the gold-standard is investigated in a meta-regression. Comparisons are conducted at the maximum follow-up time and at earlier evaluation times. CEs definition does not only include death before AE but also end of follow-up for AEs due to events related to the disease course or safety of the treatment. RESULTS: Ten sponsor organizations provided 17 clinical trials including 186 types of investigated AEs. The one minus Kaplan-Meier estimator was on average about 1.2-fold larger than the Aalen-Johansen estimator and the probability transform of the incidence density ignoring CEs was even 2-fold larger. The average bias using the incidence proportion was less than 5%. Assuming constant hazards using incidence densities was hardly an issue provided that CEs were accounted for. The meta-regression showed that the bias depended mainly on the amount of censoring and on the amount of CEs. CONCLUSIONS: The choice of the estimator of the cumulative AE probability and the definition of CEs are crucial. We recommend using the Aalen-Johansen estimator with an appropriate definition of CEs whenever the risk for AEs is to be quantified and to change the guidelines accordingly.

BetaEval Global: Prospective, Multinational, Observational Cohort Study of Patients Using BETACONNECT®.

PURPOSE: Patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) would benefit from continued long-term treatment with disease-modifying therapies, and autoinjectors may help improve patients' satisfaction with therapy, thereby increasing adherence rates. BETACONNECT® is an autoinjector for interferon beta-1b designed to improve the injection experience for patients. The BetaEval Global study assessed medication intake in patients using BETACONNECT to further investigate the value of this autoinjector. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The BetaEval Global study was a prospective, non-interventional cohort study across multiple European countries in patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) or clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) who were starting interferon beta-1b treatment. The decision to administer interferon beta-1b was made independently of the study. Patients were assessed at the initial visits and planned follow-up visits at Weeks 4, 12, and 24. The primary outcome variable was compliance with therapy based on the medication possession ratio (MPR). Injections were automatically recorded by the BETACONNECT device or, in some instances, self-reported by the patients. This allowed for a complete dataset that could be used in the calculation of the MPR. RESULTS: Four hundred ninety-eight patients were enrolled and completed 93.9%, 95.2%, and 95.4% of prescribed injections at Weeks 4, 12, and 24, respectively. Similarly, 76.4% (n=318), 76.6% (n=297), and 81.1% (n=284) of patients completed at least 80% of their prescribed injections. Median scores assessing patient satisfaction with the autoinjector were consistently high across the study. CONCLUSION: Overall, the results from BetaEval Global demonstrated that in this cohort of patients with RRMS or CIS on interferon beta-1b, use of the BETACONNECT autoinjector was associated with high rates of compliance, adherence, and patient satisfaction.

Sleep quality, daytime sleepiness, fatigue, and quality of life in patients with multiple sclerosis treated with interferon beta-1b: results from a prospective observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Sleep disorders and fatigue are common in multiple sclerosis (MS). The underlying causes are not fully understood, and prospective studies are lacking. Therefore, we conducted a prospective, observational cohort study investigating sleep quality, fatigue, quality of life, and comorbidities in patients with MS. METHODS: Patients with relapsing-remitting MS or clinically isolated syndrome treated with interferon beta-1b were followed over two years. The primary objective was to investigate correlations between sleep quality (PSQI), fatigue (MFIS), and functional health status (SF-36). Secondary objectives were to investigate correlations of sleep quality and daytime sleepiness (ESS), depression (HADS-D), anxiety (HADS-A), pain (HSAL), and restless legs syndrome (RLS). We applied descriptive statistics, correlation and regression analyses. RESULTS: 139 patients were enrolled, 128 were available for full analysis. The proportion of poor sleepers (PSQI≥5) was 55.47% at the beginning and 37.70% by the end of the study (106 and 41 evaluable questionnaires, respectively). Poor sleepers performed worse in MFIS, SF-36, ESS, HADS-D, and HADS-A scores. The prevalence of patients with RLS was low (4.5%) and all were poor sleepers. Poor sleep quality was positively correlated with fatigue and low functional health status. These relationships were corroborated by multivariable-adjusted regression analyses. ESS values and poor sleep quality at baseline seem to predict sleep quality at the one-year follow-up. No variable predicted sleep quality at the two-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirm the high prevalence of poor sleep quality among patients with MS and its persistent correlation with fatigue and reduced quality of life over time. They highlight the importance of interventions to improve sleep quality. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01766063 (registered December 7, 2012). Registered retrospectively (first patient enrolled December 6, 2012).

Adherence, satisfaction and functional health status among patients with multiple sclerosis using the BETACONNECT® autoinjector: a prospective observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Maintaining patient adherence to disease modifying drugs in multiple sclerosis is a challenge, which can be improved by autoinjectors. The BETACONNECT® is a fully electronic autoinjector for the injection of interferon beta-1b (IFN beta-1b) automatically recording injections. METHODS: The BETAEVAL study was a prospective, observational, cohort study over 24 weeks among patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis or clinically isolated syndrome treated with IFN beta-1b in Germany using the BETACONNECT®. The primary aim was to investigate treatment adherence, secondary aims included assessing satisfaction and functional health status. Adherence was evaluated from injection data recorded by the device. Patient-related data were obtained from clinical examinations and patient questionnaires. RESULTS: Of the 151 patients enrolled, 143 were available for analysis. Thirty-four patients discontinued the study prematurely. 107/143 (74.8%) patients still used the BETACONNECT® at the end of the study. Injection data from the device at any visit was available for 107 patients. Among those, the percentage of adherent patients injecting ≥80% of doses and still participating in the study was 57.9% at week 24. 29% of patients prematurely stopped the study, 13.1% injected <80%. Among patients with BETACONNECT® data at the respective visit, the proportion of adherent patients was high over the entire study period (week 4: 81.1% [N = 95], week 12: 86.7% [N = 83], week 24: 80.5% [N = 77]). Participants (N = 143) indicated high satisfaction with the BETACONNECT®. At week 24, 98.0% of patients who completed the corresponding questionnaire (strongly) agreed that it was user-friendly, 81.2% felt confident in using it compared to their previous way and 85.5% preferred it to their previous way of injection. Injection-related pain was rated as mild to moderate at all follow-up visits. Whereas 17.2% of patients with corresponding questionnaire indicated using analgesics prior to injection at week 4, only 9.1% did at week 24. Outcomes from questionnaires assessing functional health status, depression, fatigue and cognitive function were very similar throughout the study course. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients continued using the BETACONNECT® for IFN beta-1b treatment during the 24-week study period. Adherence was high among participants still using the BETACONNECT® and patients were highly satisfied with the device. Ongoing studies will evaluate long-term adherence and treatment outcomes in patients using the BETACONNECT®. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrails.gov NCT02121444 (registered April 22, 2014).

Interferon beta-1b in treatment-naïve paediatric patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: Two-year results from the BETAPAEDIC study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Study evaluating Betaferon(R)'s safety and tolerability in paediatric patients with multiple sclerosis (BETAPAEDIC) is a prospective, open-label observational multicentre study to assess the safety and effectiveness of interferon beta-1b in paediatric patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. METHODS: Treatment-naïve patients (12-16 years) scheduled to start interferon beta-1b were enrolled with follow-up visits every six months for two years. Effectiveness was evaluated by annualised relapse rate, Expanded Disability Status Scale progression, cranial magnetic resonance imaging and cognitive testing. Fatigue was assessed by the Fatigue Severity Scale. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients were screened and 67 enrolled, with mean (standard deviation) age 14.2 (1.3) years (n=65 in the effectiveness analysis). Mean disease duration was 11 months before study enrolment; at baseline, mean (standard deviation) Expanded Disability Status Scale was 0.6 (1.0); T2 lesion number 18.3 (15.1). Mean annualised relapse rate during the study was 0.7 (n=57), 28/57 patients (49.1%) had no relapses and for 40/52 (76.9%) no Expanded Disability Status Scale progression was observed; 23/56 (41.1%) were relapse- and progression-free to last follow-up. Neuropsychological test and fatigue scores were within normal ranges (baseline and last follow-up). Eighteen patients had fatigue at some point. New T2 and gadolinium-enhancing (Gd+) lesions were seen in 43/55 (66.2%) and 29/55 (52.7%) patients respectively. Most frequent adverse events were influenza-like illness, headache, injection-site reactions and elevated liver enzymes. CONCLUSION: Interferon beta-1b is an effective treatment with a favourable safety profile for paediatric patients.

Scheduled versus Pro Re Nata Dosing in the VIEW Trials.

PURPOSE: To analyze visual acuity (VA) outcomes before and after preplanned treatment regimen change in the VIEW studies at week 52 (W52). DESIGN: Multiple post hoc analyses for retrospectively defined subgroups in 2 multicenter, multinational, double-masked trials. PARTICIPANTS: Two thousand four hundred fifty-seven neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) patients. METHODS: Patients were randomized to treatment with 0.5 mg ranibizumab given monthly, a 0.5-mg or 2-mg intravitreal aflibercept injection given monthly, or 2 mg intravitreal aflibercept given every other month, after 3 initial monthly doses, up to W52. From W52 through W96, patients received their original dosing assignment using a capped pro re nata (PRN) regimen, with defined retreatment criteria based on VA and morphologic signs of disease activity and mandatory dosing at least every 12 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Best-corrected VA (BCVA) and optical coherence tomography assessments were mandatory at all visits from baseline to W96. Outcomes were changes in BCVA and central retinal thickness. Outcomes were evaluated in all patients who completed 2 years of the VIEW studies using the last observation carried forward method for missing data at interim visits. RESULTS: After W52, approximately 20% of patients lost 5 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters or more across all treatment arms with PRN treatment. Patients who met the retreatment criterion of loss of 5 ETDRS letters or more in the first quarter of the PRN dosing phase did not recover; mean final VA loss across the 4 study arms was -4.4 to -5.8 letters. Outcomes of these patients up to W52 were indistinguishable from those of the overall population. There were no differences between groups in serious ocular adverse events or Anti-Platelet Trialists' Collaboration arterial thromboembolic events through W96. CONCLUSIONS: These analyses suggest that there are subgroups of patients for whom VA outcomes in the second year of the VIEW studies were less stable than in the first year and for whom W52 seems to be an important inflection point. Although alternate reasons specific to the nature of the underlying AMD cannot be fully excluded, the switch in treatment regimen at W52 is a plausible explanation.

Improvement in vision-related function with intravitreal aflibercept: data from phase 3 studies in wet age-related macular degeneration.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of intravitreal aflibercept injection on visual function in wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD). DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter, double-masked, active-controlled, parallel-group, randomized phase 3 clinical studies (VEGF Trap-Eye: Investigation of Efficacy and Safety in Wet AMD [VIEW] 1 and 2 [clinicaltrials.gov identifiers, NCT00509795 and NCT00637377, respectively]). PARTICIPANTS: Patients (n=2419) with active, treatment-naïve, exudative AMD. This analysis included patients who received intravitreal aflibercept 2.0 mg every 8 weeks (2q8; n=607) or ranibizumab 0.5 mg every 4 weeks (0.5q4; n=595). INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized 1:1:1:1 to receive intravitreal aflibercept 2q8 (after 3 initial monthly doses), intravitreal aflibercept 2q4, intravitreal aflibercept 0.5q4, or ranibizumab 0.5q4 in the study eye. Patients in the intravitreal aflibercept 2q8 group received a sham injection alternating with active treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25) was administered at baseline and at weeks 12, 24, 36, and 52. The NEI VFQ-25 subscale scores were compared between intravitreal aflibercept 2q8 and ranibizumab 0.5q4 treatment arms, the approved dosing for each agent worldwide. Change in composite NEI VFQ-25 score was evaluated based on categorical change in visual acuity (worsened, unchanged, improved). RESULTS: Baseline NEI VFQ-25 scores were similar for both treatments in both studies. Mean change from baseline to 52 weeks was similar for ranibizumab 0.5q4 and intravitreal aflibercept 2q8 across all 12 subscales, with the greatest improvements noted for mental health and general vision (9.0-11.6 points, both treatments, both studies). Improvement of 4 points or more (both treatments, both studies) also was observed for subscales near vision, distance vision, role difficulties, and dependency. Mean change from baseline to 52 weeks in NEI VFQ-25 composite score (pooled data) stratified by clinical response showed meaningful improvement only in patients who gained 5 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy letters or more (7.3 and 7.8 points for intravitreal aflibercept 2q8 and ranibizumab 0.5q4, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Visual function outcomes were similar across all NEI VFQ-25 subscales over 52 weeks for intravitreal aflibercept 2q8 and ranibizumab 0.5q4, with clinically meaningful improvement recorded in 6 of 12 subscales.

Intravitreal aflibercept injection for neovascular age-related macular degeneration: ninety-six-week results of the VIEW studies.

PURPOSE: To determine efficacy and safety of intravitreal aflibercept in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) during a second year of variable dosing after a first-year fixed-dosing period. DESIGN: Two randomized, double-masked, active-controlled, phase 3 trials. PARTICIPANTS: Two thousand four hundred fifty-seven patients with neovascular AMD. METHODS: From baseline to week 52, patients received 0.5 mg intravitreal ranibizumab every 4 weeks (Rq4), 2 mg aflibercept every 4 weeks (2q4), 0.5 mg aflibercept every 4 weeks (0.5q4), or 2 mg aflibercept every 8 weeks (2q8) after 3 monthly injections. During weeks 52 through 96, patients received their original dosing assignment using an as-needed regimen with defined retreatment criteria and mandatory dosing at least every 12 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of eyes at week 96 that maintained best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA; lost <15 letters from baseline); change from baseline in BCVA. RESULTS: Proportions of eyes maintaining BCVA across treatments were 94.4% to 96.1% at week 52 and 91.5% to 92.4% at week 96. Mean BCVA gains were 8.3 to 9.3 letters at week 52 and 6.6 to 7.9 letters at week 96. Proportions of eyes without retinal fluid decreased from week 52 (60.3% to 72.4%) to week 96 (44.6% to 54.4%), and more 2q4 eyes were without fluid at weeks 52 and 96 than Rq4 eyes (difference of 10.4% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 4.9-15.9] and 9.0% [95% CI, 3.0-15.1]). Patients received on average 16.5, 16.0, 16.2, and 11.2 injections over 96 weeks and 4.7, 4.1, 4.6, and 4.2 injections during weeks 52 through 96 in the Rq4, 2q4, 0.5q4, and 2q8 groups, respectively. The number of injections during weeks 52 through 96 was lower in the 2q4 and 2q8 groups versus the Rq4 group (differences of -0.64 [95% CI, -0.89 to -0.40] and -0.55 [95% CI, -0.79 to -0.30]; P < 0.0001, post hoc analysis). Incidences of Antiplatelet Trialists' Collaboration-defined arterial thromboembolic events were similar across groups (2.4% to 3.8%) from baseline to week 96. CONCLUSIONS: All aflibercept and ranibizumab groups were equally effective in improving BCVA and preventing BCVA loss at 96 weeks. The 2q8 aflibercept group was similar to ranibizumab in visual acuity outcomes during 96 weeks, but with an average of 5 fewer injections. Small losses at 96 weeks in the visual and anatomic gains seen at 52 weeks in all arms were in the range of losses commonly observed with variable dosing.

Efficacy and safety of an orodispersible vardenafil formulation for the treatment of erectile dysfunction in elderly men and those with underlying conditions: an integrated analysis of two pivotal trials.

INTRODUCTION: Men with erectile dysfunction (ED) are typically older and have one or more underlying cardiovascular conditions. AIM: To determine the efficacy and safety of a new orodispersible tablet (ODT) formulation of vardenafil for the treatment of ED, and whether age, or the presence of underlying conditions affects treatment outcomes. METHODS: This is an integrated analysis of data from two phase III, double-blind, multicenter, randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled studies that compared 10 mg on-demand vardenafil ODT with placebo in a general population of men with ED, stratified so that approximately 50% of patients were aged ≥ 65 years. Results were reported by age (<6 5 vs. ≥ 65 years) and presence/absence of diabetes, dyslipidemia, or hypertension. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary measures were the erectile function domain of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) and Sexual Encounter Profile questions 2 (SEP2) and 3 (SEP3). RESULTS: Of the 701 men randomized (51% aged ≥ 65 years), 686 were included in the intent-to-treat population (placebo, n = 334; vardenafil ODT, n = 352). Vardenafil ODT was significantly superior to placebo for all primary efficacy measures, regardless of age, baseline ED severity, or underlying condition (P < 0.0001 for vardenafil vs. placebo for each endpoint). IIEF-EF scores and SEP2/3 success rates in older patients and men with underlying conditions were not significantly different to those of younger patients or men without underlying conditions. Adverse events (AEs) were mostly mild to moderate in severity, occurring with higher incidence in the vardenafil vs. placebo group. The most frequently reported drug-related AEs in the vardenafil group were headache, flushing, nasal congestion, dizziness, and dyspepsia, consistent with the known safety profile of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: Vardenafil ODT significantly improves erectile function in men with ED regardless of age, baseline ED severity, or underlying condition.

Vardenafil improves erectile function in men with erectile dysfunction and associated underlying conditions, irrespective of the use of concomitant medications.

INTRODUCTION: Men with erectile dysfunction (ED) are also likely to have associated underlying conditions. AIM: This retrospective analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of vardenafil in men with ED and underlying conditions, including those taking concomitant medications. METHODS: A total of 13 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical studies were included. Vardenafil was administered at a starting dose of 10 mg, adjustable to 5 or 20 mg after 4 weeks. Efficacy analyses were performed on the intent-to-treat (ITT) population, using a last observation carried forward approach. Efficacy was assessed for subgroups of patients with diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, or metabolic syndrome (as defined by International Diabetes Federation criteria). Incidence rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were analyzed overall and by subgroup for patients in the safety population. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary efficacy measures were the erectile function domain of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-EF), and Sexual Encounter Profile questions 2 and 3 (SEP2, SEP3). RESULTS: In total, 4,326 patients were randomized to treatment; the ITT population included 4,143 patients, with 4,266 patients valid for safety. At 12 weeks, vardenafil therapy was associated with statistically significant improvements from baseline in IIEF-EF scores, and SEP2 and SEP3 success rates, including patients with ED and diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, or metabolic syndrome. These improvements were irrespective of level of glycemic control, or use of concomitant medications for the treatment of diabetes, hypertension, or dyslipidemia. Across all subgroups, the number and type of treatment-emergent adverse events were consistent with results from previous studies of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors in men with ED and underlying conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Vardenafil demonstrated favorable efficacy and tolerability in this large pool of patients with ED and underlying conditions. Importantly, the use of concomitant medications was not associated with any noteworthy changes in the efficacy or safety profile of vardenafil.

Vardenafil is effective and well-tolerated for treating erectile dysfunction in a broad population of men, irrespective of age.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of vardenafil in the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED) in men of different age groups. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a retrospective pooled subgroup analysis of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies, men from the general population with ED received either placebo or vardenafil 5, 10 or 20 mg over 12 weeks. Efficacy variables included the erectile function (EF) domain score from The International Index of Erectile Function, diary response rates to questions on vaginal penetration and maintenance of erection, and positive responses to the Global Assessment Question (GAQ) "Has the treatment you have been taking over the past 4 weeks improved your erections?'. The 1385 men were grouped by age (< 45, 45-64 and > or =65 years). RESULTS: At 12 weeks the EF domain scores approached 20 with vardenafil and 14 with placebo in men aged > or = 65 years (P < 0.03 vardenafil 5 mg vs placebo, P < 0.001 vardenafil 10 and 20 mg vs placebo). The corresponding scores were 22 and 14 in men aged 45-64 years and up to 24 and 16 in those aged <45 years (P < 0.03 vardenafil 5 mg vs placebo, P < 0.001 vardenafil 10 and 20 mg vs placebo). Vardenafil generated positive GAQ responses in approximately 71%, 76% and 85% of men aged <45, 45-64 and > or = 65 years (P < or = 0.001 vardenafil vs placebo). The corresponding placebo rates were 23%, 25% and 34%. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were headache, rhinitis, flushing and dyspepsia, which were mild to moderate, transient and unrelated to age. CONCLUSION: Vardenafil is an effective and generally well-tolerated treatment for ED, irrespective of age.