Systematic evidence synthesis of treatments for ADHD in children and adolescents: indirect treatment comparisons of lisdexamfetamine with methylphenidate and atomoxetine.

OBJECTIVE: Systematically review and synthesize the clinical evidence of treatments for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) by indirectly comparing established treatments in the UK with a drug recently approved in Europe (lisdexamfetamine [LDX]). POPULATION: children and adolescents. SETTING: Europe. Comparators: methylphenidate (MPH), atomoxetine (ATX), and dexamphetamine (DEX). Electronic databases and relevant conference proceedings were searched for randomized, controlled clinical trials evaluating efficacy and safety of at least one of the comparators and LDX. Quality assessments for each included trial were performed using criteria recommended by the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Network meta-analysis methods for dichotomous outcomes were employed to evaluate treatment efficacy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Response, as defined by either a reduction from baseline of at least 25% in the ADHD Rating Scale [ADHD-RS] total score or, separately, as assessed on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement [CGI-I] scale, and safety (all-cause withdrawals and withdrawal due to adverse events). RESULTS: The systematic review found 32 trials for the meta-analysis, including data on LDX, ATX, and different formulations of MPH. No trials for DEX meeting the inclusion criteria were found. Sufficient data were identified for each outcome: ADHD-RS, 16 trials; CGI-I, 20 trials; all-cause withdrawals, 28 trials; and withdrawals due to adverse events, 27 trials. The relative probability of treatment response for CGI-I (95% confidence intervals [CI]) for ATX versus LDX was 0.65 (0.53-0.78); for long-acting MPH versus LDX, 0.82 (0.69-0.97); for intermediate release MPH versus LDX, 0.51 (0.40-0.65); and for short-acting MPH versus LDX, 0.62 (0.51-0.76). The relative probabilities of ADHD-RS treatment response also favored LDX. CONCLUSIONS: For the treatment of ADHD, the synthesis of efficacy data showed statistically significant better probabilities of response with LDX than for formulations of MPH or ATX. The analysis of safety data proved inconclusive due to low event rates. These results may be limited by the studies included, which only investigated the short-term efficacy of medications in patients without comorbid disorders.

Annualized relapse rate of first-line treatments for multiple sclerosis: a meta-analysis, including indirect comparisons versus fingolimod.

OBJECTIVES: Previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses of treatments in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) derived their findings from either placebo-controlled studies only or separately from head-to-head and comparative studies. The purpose of this study is to compare annualized relapse rates (ARR) of fingolimod versus all of the commonly used first-line treatments in RRMS using evidence from both placebo-controlled and head-to-head studies. In absence of the head-to-head data between fingolimod and the other treatments, these comparisons were formed using meta-analysis techniques for indirect treatment comparisons. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library with no limitations applied on publication language or dates. Included studies were randomized controlled trials evaluating one or more of fingolimod, interferon beta-1a, interferon beta-1b, or glatiramer acetate in RRMS populations. Primary outcome was ARR. Data extraction included author, year, treatment, dosage, mean age, percentage females, duration of disease, Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score at baseline, relapses in 2 years prior to baseline, trial duration, relapse-related outcome, and definition of relapse. The indirect treatment comparisons were performed using a mixed-treatment comparison framework. ARR was analyzed as a Poisson outcome. RESULTS: The relative ARRs, for each treatment versus fingolimod, estimated from our meta-analyses were 1.43 (glatiramer acetate 20 mg), 1.51 (interferon beta-1b 250 mcg), 1.55 (interferon beta-1a 44 mcg), 1.67 (interferon beta-1a 22 mcg), 1.93 (interferon beta-1a 30 mcg), and 2.32 (placebo). None of the 95% confidence intervals for these estimates overlapped unity, implying statistical significance of these findings. LIMITATIONS: The key limitations of this study are the persisting heterogeneity even after adjusting for covariates and the variability in outcome definition across the included trials. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that fingolimod significantly reduces relapse frequency in patients with RRMS compared with current first-line disease-modifying therapies.

Persistence of glaucoma medical therapy in the Glasgow Glaucoma Database.

AIMS: To report the persistence of glaucoma medical therapy in a database of 1006 patients with ocular hypertension (OHT), normal tension glaucoma (NTG) and primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) attending the Glaucoma Clinic at Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK. METHOD: Analyses have been carried out using specially written queries to generate reports relating to initial treatment choice and persistence for individual drugs. Queries were investigated in the database time period from 16 February 1982 to 11 February 2009. When investigating drug persistence, the results from the database were split into two distinct time periods from 1997 to 2001 and from 2002 to 2009 to reflect the available treatment options used. RESULTS: The number of patients with each diagnosis was as follows: POAG 608; OHT 246; NTG 152. The Kaplan-Meier estimate for mean persistence from 1997 to 2001 (time to treatment discontinuation) of latanoprost was 58.8 ± 1.95 months, timolol was 41.8 ± 3.94 months, brimonidine was 24.1 ± 3.05 months, and betaxolol was 22.9 ± 2.04 months. The Kaplan-Meier estimate for mean persistence from 2002 to 2009 of latanoprost (time to treatment discontinuation) was 52.0 ± 2.26 months, bimatoprost was 25.8 ± 2.89 months, and travoprost was 23.0 ± 1.27 months. The Kaplan-Meier estimate for mean persistence of latanoprost (time to treatment change) was 37.5 ± 2.47 months, travoprost was 30.2 ± 2.70 months, and bimatoprost was 17.5 ± 2.88 months. CONCLUSION: The introduction of the first prostaglandin analogue, latanoprost, dramatically improved treatment persistence for glaucoma patients. In the current prostaglandin-rich treatment environment, these data do not show any significant differences between prostaglandins with respect to treatment persistence.

Economic evaluation of dabigatran etexilate for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients aged over 75 years or with moderate renal impairment undergoing total knee or hip replacement.

Oral dabigatran etexilate is indicated for the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients undergoing total knee replacement or total hip replacement. We investigated the cost-effectiveness of the 150 mg once daily (od) dose recommended for patients aged over 75 or with moderate renal impairment, from a United Kingdom National Health Service perspective. Dabigatran etexilate was compared with subcutaneous enoxaparin 40 mg od, using a decision model. Risks for VTE and bleeding were derived from subgroup analyses of the phase III trials. Dabigatran etexilate was less costly than enoxaparin; cost savings varied from pound62 to pound274 (base-case analyses) and were primarily due to differences in administration costs. Results were robust across a range of sensitivity analyses. Dabigatran etexilate 150 mg od is cost saving compared with enoxaparin 40 mg od in patients aged over 75years and in patients with moderate renal impairment, with comparable efficacy and safety.

Atovaquone-proguanil versus mefloquine for malaria prophylaxis in nonimmune travelers: results from a randomized, double-blind study.

Concerns about the tolerability of mefloquine highlight the need for new drugs to prevent malaria. Atovaquone-proguanil (Malarone; GlaxoSmithKline) was safe and effective for prevention of falciparum malaria in lifelong residents of malaria-endemic countries, but experience in nonimmune people is limited. In a randomized, double-blind study, nonimmune travelers received malaria prophylaxis with atovaquone-proguanil (493 subjects) or mefloquine (483 subjects). Information about adverse events (AEs) and potential episodes of malaria was obtained 7, 28, and 60 days after travel. AEs were reported by an equivalent proportion of subjects who had received atovaquone-proguanil or mefloquine (71.4% versus 67.3%; difference, 4.1%; 95% confidence interval, -1.71 to 9.9). Subjects who received atovaquone-proguanil had fewer treatment-related neuropsychiatric AEs (14% versus 29%; P=.001), fewer AEs of moderate or severe intensity (10% versus 19%; P=.001), and fewer AEs that caused prophylaxis to be discontinued (1.2% versus 5.0%; P=.001), compared with subjects who received melfoquine. No confirmed diagnoses of malaria occurred in either group. Atovaquone-proguanil was better tolerated than was mefloquine, and it was similarly effective for malaria prophylaxis in nonimmune travelers.

Atovaquone-proguanil versus chloroquine-proguanil for malaria prophylaxis in non-immune travellers: a randomised, double-blind study. Malarone International Study Team.

BACKGROUND: Chloroquine plus proguanil is widely used for malaria chemoprophylaxis despite low effectiveness in areas where multidrug-resistant malaria occurs. Studies have shown that atovaquone and proguanil hydrochloride is safe and effective for prevention of falciparum malaria in lifelong residents of malaria-endemic countries, but little is known about non-immune travellers. METHODS: In a double-blind equivalence trial, 1083 participants travelling to a malaria-endemic area were randomly assigned to two treatment groups: atovaquone-proguanil plus placebos for chloroquine and proguanil, or chloroquine, proguanil, and placebo for atovaquone-proguanil. Follow-up was by telephone 7 and 60 days after travel and at a clinic at 28 days. Serum samples were tested for antibodies to a malaria circumsporozoite protein. Blood and serum samples of participants with a potential malaria diagnosis were tested in a reference laboratory. FINDINGS: 7 days after travel, at least one adverse event was reported by 311 (61%) of 511 participants who received atovaquone-proguanil and 329 (64%) of 511 who received chloroquine-proguanil. People receiving atovaquone-proguanil had a lower frequency of treatment-related gastrointestinal adverse events (59 [12%] vs 100 [20%], p=0.001), and of treatment-related adverse events of moderate or severe intensity (37 [7%] vs 56 [11%], p=0.05). There were fewer treatment-related adverse events that caused prophylaxis to be discontinued in the atovaquone-proguanil group than in the chloroquine-proguanil group (one [0.2%] vs ten [2%], p=0.015). INTERPRETATION: Overall the two preparations were similarly tolerated. However, significantly fewer adverse gastrointestinal events were observed in the atovaquone-proguanil group in than in the chloroquine-proguanil group.

Safety and pharmacokinetics of amprenavir (141W94), a human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) type 1 protease inhibitor, following oral administration of single doses to HIV-infected adults.

We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel, dose-escalation trial to evaluate the pharmacokinetics and safety of single, oral doses of amprenavir (141W94; formerly VX-478), a potent inhibitor of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) type 1 protease, administered as hard gelatin capsules in 12 HIV-infected subjects. The doses of amprenavir evaluated were 150, 300, 600, 900, and 1,200 mg. Amprenavir was rapidly absorbed, with the time to maximum concentration occurring within 1 to 2 h after dosing. On the basis of power model analysis, the increase in the maximum concentration of amprenavir in plasma (Cmax) was less than dose proportional, and the increase in the area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC0-infinity) was greater than dose proportional; mean slopes (with 90% confidence intervals) were 1.25 (1.16 to 1.35) and 0.78 (0.78 to 0.86) for AUC0-infinity and Cmax, respectively. Amprenavir was eliminated slowly, with a terminal-phase half-life of 8 h. A second study was conducted to determine the bioavailability of the hard gelatin capsule relative to that of a subsequently developed soft gelatin capsule. The capsules were bioequivalent in terms of AUC0-infinity but not in terms of Cmax; geometric-least-squares means ratios (with 90% confidence intervals) were 1.03 (0.92 to 1.14) and 1.25 (1.03 to 1. 53) for AUC0-infinity and Cmax, respectively. Administration of soft gelatin capsules of amprenavir with a high-fat breakfast resulted in a 14% decrease in the mean AUC0-infinity (from 9.58 to 8.26 microg. h/ml), which is not likely to be clinically significant. The most common adverse events related to amprenavir were headache, nausea, and hypesthesia. Amprenavir appears to be safe and well tolerated over the dose range of 150 to 1200 mg. On the basis of the present single-dose studies, amprenavir is an HIV protease inhibitor with favorable absorption and clearance pharmacokinetics that are only minimally affected by administration with food.

Safety and efficacy of atovaquone and proguanil hydrochloride for the prophylaxis of Plasmodium falciparum malaria in South Africa.

The objective of this study was to determine the safety and efficacy of atovaquone and proguanil hydrochloride combination therapy for the prophylaxis of Plasmodium falciparum malaria in at-risk nonimmune subjects in South Africa. This open-label trial was conducted at research sites in South Africa during the main malaria transmission season, February through July. The study volunteers were temporarily living in, or traveling to, a malaria-endemic area. They received I tablet of 250 mg atovaquone and 100 mg proguanil hydrochloride once daily for up to 10 weeks. Subjects were monitored using sequential clinical and laboratory assessments. Thick blood smears were stained and evaluated by a central laboratory. An immunochromatographic test for P. falciparum was also used for on-site patient management. Prophylactic success was summarized using a 95% confidence interval for the proportion of subjects who did not develop parasitemia or who withdrew due to a treatment-related adverse event. A total of 175 subjects (15% women) were enrolled in the trial. The mean duration of drug exposure was 8.9 weeks. The combination of atovaquone and proguanil hydrochloride was well tolerated. The most frequently reported adverse events considered possibly related to study treatment were headache (7%), abdominal pain (2%), increased cough (2%), and skin disorder (2%). No serious adverse events were reported, and no treatment-emergent effects were noted for any laboratory variables. One subject who was noncompliant with therapy developed parasitemia, and 3 subjects withdrew due to a treatment-related adverse event (2 subjects with headache and 1 with nausea and dizziness). The prophylaxis success rate was 97%. In this study, atovaquone and proguanil hydrochloride combination therapy had an excellent safety and efficacy profile for prophylaxis of P. falciparum malaria in nonimmune subjects.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled field trial to determine the efficacy and safety of Malarone (atovaquone/proguanil) for the prophylaxis of malaria in Zambia.

Malaria poses a major health risk to people who are exposed to infection in malaria-endemic areas. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted to determine the efficacy and safety of Malarone (250 mg of atovaquone/100 mg of proguanil hydrochloride per tablet) for the chemoprophylaxis of Plasmodium falciparum malaria in Zambia. Adult volunteers received a three-day treatment course of Malarone to eliminate pre-existing parasitemia and were then immediately randomized to treatment with either one Malarone tablet daily (n = 136), or one placebo tablet daily (n = 138) for at least 10 weeks. Malaria blood smears were prepared on a weekly basis and a failure of chemoprophylaxis was defined as any subject who had a positive blood smear, or who withdrew from the study due to a treatment-related adverse event. The prophylaxis success rates in the Malarone and placebo groups were 98% and 63%, respectively (P < 0.001). The most commonly reported adverse events with at least a possible causal relationship to study medication were headache and abdominal pain, which occurred with a higher incidence in the placebo group. No subjects were withdrawn from the study due to a treatment-related adverse event. Thus, Malarone appears to have an excellent safety and efficacy profile for the chemoprophylaxis of P. falciparum infection.