Efficacy and safety of nintedanib in patients with advanced idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: The two 52-week INPULSIS trials investigated nintedanib versus placebo in patients with IPF, FVC ≥50% predicted and DLco 30-79% predicted. The 24-week INSTAGE trial investigated nintedanib plus sildenafil versus nintedanib alone in patients with IPF and DLco ≤35% predicted. We used data from INPULSIS and INSTAGE to compare the effects of nintedanib in patients with IPF with less versus more severe impairment in gas exchange at baseline. METHODS: Analyses were conducted in patients treated with nintedanib alone in the INPULSIS and INSTAGE trials and in patients treated with placebo in the INPULSIS trials. Outcomes included the rate of decline in FVC over 24 weeks, the proportions of patients who had a confirmed or suspected idiopathic acute exacerbation over 24 weeks, deaths over 24 weeks, and adverse events. Analyses were descriptive. RESULTS: In total, 638 and 136 patients received nintedanib alone in the INPULSIS and INSTAGE trials, respectively, and 423 patients received placebo in the INPULSIS trials. Rates of FVC decline were - 52.3 and - 66.7 mL/24 weeks in patients treated with nintedanib alone in INPULSIS and INSTAGE, respectively, and - 102.8 mL/24 weeks in patients treated with placebo in INPULSIS. Confirmed or suspected idiopathic acute exacerbations were reported in 0.6 and 3.7% of patients treated with nintedanib alone in INPULSIS and INSTAGE, respectively, and 2.1% of patients treated with placebo in INPULSIS. Deaths occurred in 2.0, 11.0 and 1.9% of patients in these groups, respectively. Diarrhoea adverse events were reported in 52.5 and 48.5% of patients treated with nintedanib alone in INPULSIS and INSTAGE, respectively, and 16.1% of patients treated with placebo in INPULSIS. CONCLUSIONS: Based on data from the INSTAGE and INPULSIS trials, nintedanib had a similar effect on FVC decline over 24 weeks, and a similar safety and tolerability profile, in patients with IPF and more versus less severe impairment in gas exchange. These data support the use of nintedanib in patients with IPF who have advanced disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: INPULSIS (NCT01335464 and NCT01335477); INSTAGE (NCT02802345).

Nintedanib and Sildenafil in Patients with Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis and Right Heart Dysfunction. A Prespecified Subgroup Analysis of a Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial (INSTAGE).

Rationale: In the INSTAGE trial in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and severely impaired gas exchange, nintedanib plus sildenafil was associated with numerical benefits on St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score, brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), and FVC decline versus nintedanib alone. Exploratory analyses of the STEP-IPF (Sildenafil Trial of Exercise Performance in IPF) trial suggested that sildenafil may have a greater effect on SGRQ score in patients with IPF who have right heart dysfunction (RHD).Objectives: Assess whether RHD influenced the effects of nintedanib plus sildenafil versus nintedanib alone in the INSTAGE trial.Methods: Subgroup analyses of patients with (n = 117) versus those without (n = 156) echocardiographic signs of RHD at baseline.Measurements and Main Results: There was no heterogeneity between subgroups by presence of RHD in the effect of nintedanib plus sildenafil versus nintedanib alone on change in SGRQ total score at Week 12 (P = 0.74) or Week 24 (P = 0.90), or change in FVC at Week 12 (P = 0.58) or Week 24 (P = 0.55). In both subgroups, nintedanib plus sildenafil had a numerically greater effect on reducing FVC decline versus nintedanib alone. Between-group differences in change in BNP at Week 24 were -119.9 ng/L (95% confidence interval = -171.3 to -68.5) and -3.6 ng/L (95% confidence interval = -47.2 to 40.0) in patients with and without signs of RHD at baseline, respectively (P < 0.01).Conclusions: In the INSTAGE trial, there were no significant differences in the effects of nintedanib plus sildenafil versus nintedanib alone on changes in SGRQ and FVC between patients with or without echocardiographic signs of RHD at baseline. The benefit of combination therapy on stabilizing BNP was more pronounced in patients with RHD at baseline.Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02802345).

Nintedanib plus Sildenafil in Patients with Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Nintedanib is an approved treatment for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). A subgroup analysis of a previously published trial suggested that sildenafil may provide benefits regarding oxygenation, gas exchange as measured by the diffusion capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide (DlCO), symptoms, and quality of life in patients with IPF and severely decreased DlCO. That idea was tested in this trial. METHODS: We randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients with IPF and a DlCO of 35% or less of the predicted value to receive nintedanib at a dose of 150 mg twice daily plus sildenafil at a dose of 20 mg three times daily (nintedanib-plus-sildenafil group) or nintedanib at a dose of 150 mg twice daily plus placebo three times daily (nintedanib group) for 24 weeks. The primary end point was the change from baseline in the total score on the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) at week 12 (the total score ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating worse health-related quality of life). Secondary end points included measures of dyspnea and safety. RESULTS: A total of 274 patients underwent randomization. There was no significant difference in the adjusted mean change from baseline in the SGRQ total score at week 12 between the nintedanib-plus-sildenafil group and the nintedanib group (-1.28 points and -0.77 points, respectively; P=0.72). A benefit from sildenafil treatment was not observed with regard to dyspnea as measured with the use of the University of California, San Diego, Shortness of Breath Questionnaire. No new safety signals were observed, as compared with previous trials. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with IPF and a DlCO of 35% or less of the predicted value, nintedanib plus sildenafil did not provide a significant benefit as compared with nintedanib alone. No new safety signals were identified with either treatment regimen in this population of patients. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; INSTAGE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02802345 .).

Efficacy and safety of prandial premixed therapy using insulin lispro mix 50/50 3 times daily compared with progressive titration of insulin lispro mix 75/25 or biphasic insulin aspart 70/30 twice daily in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomized, 16-week, open-label study.

BACKGROUND: Prandial premixed therapy 3 times daily has been proposed recently for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients who fail to achieve glycemic control with commonly used premixed insulin analogs, insulin lispro mix 75/25 (LM75/25) and biphasic insulin aspart 70/30 (BIAsp70/30) BID. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work was to compare the efficacy and safety of 3-times daily insulin lispro mix 50/50 (TID group) with progressive titration of twice-daily LM75/25 or BIAsp70/30 (BID group) administered along with metformin in T2DM patients. METHODS: This was an open-label, 16-week, multicenter, randomized, parallel trial. End point glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) was the primary efficacy measure; HbA(1c) reduction from baseline to end point, percentage of patients reaching target HbA(1c) (<7.0% and ≤6.5%), postprandial blood glucose (BG), and BG excursions after lunch were secondary measures. Safety was evaluated by collecting adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 302 patients with mean (SD) age 57.7 (9.27) years, diabetes duration 11.2 (6.47) years, HbA(1c) 8.5% (1.23), fasting BG 184.0 (53.04) mg/dL, body weight 86.8 (14.79) kg, body mass index 31.7 (4.23) kg/m(2), and daily insulin dose ∼48 IU were randomized. No significant difference was observed in end point HbA(1c) between the 2 groups. Seven-point BG profiles showed lower fasting and postbreakfast BG in the BID group but lower postlunch BG in the TID group. Daily insulin dose change was similar in both groups, with more weight gain in the TID group (P = 0.0009). Overall hypoglycemic rates were similar in both groups, but nocturnal hypoglycemia was more frequent in the BID group (P = 0.0063). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with T2DM who have not achieved adequate glycemic control with LM75/25 and BiAsp70/30 BID plus metformin and who are not candidates for basal bolus therapy, switching either to treatment with LM50/50 TID or to progressive titration of premix insulin analogs BID did not produce sufficient evidence of a difference of overall glycemic control between the 2 treatment groups. Short study duration and less intensive dose adjustments might have contributed to these results.