Salivette® Cortisol versus oropharyngeal swabbing for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

BACKGROUND: Detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by naso/oropharyngeal swabbing may expose health-care workers to the virus and is technically challenging. The Salivette® is an alternative saliva-collection device with an oral cotton swab containing citric acid to stimulate saliva production, which may have an unpleasant taste. We present a pilot study comparing the Salivette® Cortisol (SC), which uses a synthetic swab without citric acid, against oropharyngeal swabbing for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 by reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Symptomatic SARS-CoV-2-positive patients were sampled at various timepoints. The number of patients positive/negative for SARS-CoV-2 in oropharyngeal swab and SC samples and the percentage of patients testing true positive/true negative for SARS-CoV-2 from SC samples were determined. Positivity was defined by RT-qPCR amplification of 2/3 target SARS-CoV-2 N, ORF1, and S gene sequences. RESULTS: SC demonstrated 100% specificity, 52.2% sensitivity, and positive correlation with oropharyngeal swabbing for the detection of the SARS-CoV-2 S gene. In later-stage disease, lower viral load was observed in SC samples compared with oropharyngeal swabs. CONCLUSIONS: The SC may be an alternative for SARS-CoV-2 detection where naso/oropharyngeal swabbing is not feasible/available. This technique also confirms observations that the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in the upper airway may vary due to viral load over the disease course. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04599959.

Spesolimab, an anti-interleukin-36 receptor antibody, in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: Results from a multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase IIa study.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic relapsing inflammatory skin disease, and there is increasing evidence that the interleukin (IL)-36 pathway may play a role in the pathogenesis of AD. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of spesolimab, a novel anti-IL-36 receptor antibody, in adult patients with moderate-to-severe AD. METHODS: In this phase IIa study, 51 eligible patients were randomized 2:1 to receive intravenous doses of spesolimab 600 mg or placebo every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was the percentage change from baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) score at Week 16. RESULTS: The decrease in EASI score from baseline to Week 16 was -37.9% for spesolimab versus -12.3% for placebo (adjusted mean difference -25.6%, p = 0.149). A predefined sensitivity analysis, excluding data from patients who used restricted corticosteroids, resulted in an adjusted mean difference of -48.3% (nominal p = 0.024). Spesolimab was well tolerated, with no clinically relevant safety signals. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to evaluate the IL-36 pathway inhibition in AD. Although not statistically significant, numerical improvements were observed in the primary endpoint of change from baseline in the EASI score. Spesolimab had an acceptable safety profile, with no unexcepted safety concerns.

Pilot study of an occupational healthcare program to assess the SARS-CoV-2 infection and immune status of employees in a large pharmaceutical company.

OBJECTIVE: To safeguard key workers involved in development and production of medicines and ensure business continuity, we developed an occupational healthcare program, performed by our company's occupational healthcare services, to assess the infection and immune status for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This pilot program, conducted at our company facilities, evaluated the suitability of diagnostic tools in our setting for program upscaling. METHODS: We used different marketed in vitro diagnostics (including tests for antibodies against spike protein subunits S1 and S2 and nucleocapsid [N] protein) combined with medical history, symptoms and likelihood of infection. We evaluated the testing strategy over four visits in 141 employees (known positive COVID-19 history, n = 20; unknown status, n = 121) between April and June 2020 at four company locations in Germany. Digital self-monitoring over the pilot program duration was also included. RESULTS: No incident infections were detected. Based on immune status, medical history and likelihood of infection, 10 participants (8.3%) with previously unknown history of COVID-19 were identified to have been infected before entering the program. These participants, who recalled no or mild symptoms in the preceding months, were primarily identified using an assay that detected both S1 and S2 immunoglobulin (Ig) G. The frequency of positive lateral flow assay (LFA) results (IgM or IgG directed against the N-protein) in this cohort was lower compared with participants with a known history of COVID-19 (0‒10.8% vs. 33.8‒75.7%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Data from this pilot program suggest that LFA for antibodies may not always reliably detect current, recent or past infections; consequently, these have not been included in our upscaled occupational healthcare program. Regular testing strategies for viral RNA and antibodies directed against different SARS-CoV-2 proteins, combined with hygiene rules and a comprehensive baseline assessment, are recommended to ensure avoidance of infections at workplace as reliably as possible.

Forced Expiratory Flow (FEF25-75%) as a Clinical Endpoint in Children and Adolescents with Symptomatic Asthma Receiving Tiotropium: A Post Hoc Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: In pediatric patients with asthma, measurements of forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) may be normal or may not correlate with symptom severity. Forced expiratory flow at 25-75% of the vital capacity (FEF25-75%) is a potentially more sensitive parameter for assessing peripheral airway function. This post hoc analysis compared FEF25-75% with FEV1 as an endpoint to assess bronchodilator responsiveness in children with asthma. METHODS: Change from baseline in trough FEF25-75% and trough FEV1 following treatment with either tiotropium (5 µg or 2.5 µg) or placebo Respimat® was analyzed in four phase III trials in children (aged 6-11 years) and adolescents (aged 12-17 years) with symptomatic moderate (VivaTinA-asthma® and PensieTinA-asthma®) and mild (CanoTinA-asthma® and RubaTinA-asthma®) asthma. Data from all treatment arms were pooled and correlations between FEF25-75% and FEV1 were calculated and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 1590 patients were included in the analysis. Tiotropium Respimat® consistently improved FEF25-75% and FEV1 versus placebo, although in adolescents with severe asthma, the observed improvements were not statistically significant. Improvements in FEF25-75% response with tiotropium versus placebo were largely more pronounced than improvements in FEV1. Statistical assessment of the correlation of FEV1 and FEF25-75% showed moderate-to-high correlations (Pearson's correlation coefficients 0.73-0.80). CONCLUSIONS: In pediatric patients, FEF25-75% may be a more sensitive measure to detect treatment response, certainly to tiotropium, than FEV1 and should be evaluated as an additional lung function measurement.

Efficacy of once-daily tiotropium Respimat in adults with asthma at GINA Steps 2-5.

Tiotropium Respimat is an efficacious add-on to maintenance treatment in patients with symptomatic asthma. Currently, the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) strategy recommends tiotropium for patients at Steps 4-5. To assess the clinical benefits of tiotropium Respimat across asthma severities, GINA Steps 2-5, a post hoc analysis of five double-blind trials (12-48-weeks; patients aged 18-75 years) investigated the effect of tiotropium Respimat, 5 µg or 2.5 µg, versus placebo, on peak forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) within 3 h post-dose (FEV1(0-3h)) response, and Asthma Control Questionnaire-7 (ACQ-7) responder rate. GINA step grouping was based on patients' background treatment regimen. Baseline characteristics of patients (N = 2926) were balanced between treatments. Tiotropium Respimat showed consistent improvements in lung function across GINA steps; placebo-corrected peak FEV1(0-3h) improvements after tiotropium Respimat 5 µg and 2.5 µg were: Step 2 (Week 8), 135 mL (95% confidence interval: 84, 187) and 155 mL (103, 206); Step 3 (Week 24), 187 mL (139, 235) and 235 mL (187, 283); Step 4 (Week 24), 111 mL (63, 159) and 181 mL (35, 326); Step 5 (Week 24; 5 µg only), 164 mL (5, 323). Asthma control improved with tiotropium Respimat versus placebo, showing statistical significance (nominal P value) with tiotropium Respimat 5 µg at Step 4 (odds ratio 1.36 [1.03, 1.78]). Safety profiles were similar between treatments. In conclusion, tiotropium Respimat add-on therapy improves lung function, and may improve asthma control, in adults across disease severities.

Safety and efficacy of tiotropium in children aged 1-5 years with persistent asthmatic symptoms: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have assessed the safety and efficacy of potential asthma medications in children younger than 5 years. We descriptively assessed the safety and efficacy of tiotropium, a long-acting anticholinergic drug, in children aged 1-5 years with persistent asthmatic symptoms. METHODS: This exploratory 12-week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase 2/3, regulatory multicentre trial was done at 32 hospitals, clinics, and clinical research units in 11 countries in Asia, Europe, and North America. Children aged 1-5 years with at least a 6-month history of persistent asthmatic symptoms and a need for inhaled corticosteroids were eligible. Patients were randomly allocated using an interactive voice or web-based response system to receive once-daily tiotropium 2·5 µg, tiotropium 5 µg, or placebo as an add-on to inhaled corticosteroids with or without additional controller medication. Patients and investigators were masked to study group assignment. Tiotropium was given via the Respimat inhaler once daily as two puffs of 1·25 µg in the 2·5 µg group, two puffs of 2·5 µg in the 5 µg group, or two puffs of placebo. The primary outcomes were safety, which was assessed by comparing adverse events between the tiotropium and placebo groups, and efficacy, which was measured as the change in weekly mean combined daytime asthma symptom score from baseline to week 12. Statistical analyses of treatment effects were exploratory; although endpoints were defined, they were used for descriptive analyses only. The safety and primary analyses were done in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01634113), and is completed. FINDINGS: Between July 26, 2012, and Dec 4, 2014, 102 children were randomly assigned to the three treatment groups (36 to receive tiotropium 2·5 µg, 32 to receive tiotropium 5 µg, and 34 to receive placebo). 101 children completed the study and were included in the analyses. The changes in adjusted weekly mean combined daytime asthma symptom scores between baseline and week 12 were not significantly different between any of the groups. The adjusted mean difference between the tiotropium 2·5 µg group and placebo group was -0·080 (95% CI -0·312 to 0·152) and the difference between tiotropium 5 µg and placebo group was -0·048 (-0·292 to 0·195). Adverse events were less frequent with tiotropium treatment than with placebo (20 [56%] of 36 children with tiotropium 2·5 µg, 18 [58%] of 31 with tiotropium 5 µg, and 25 [74%] of 34 with placebo), although no formal statistical comparison between groups was performed. A greater proportion of children reported asthma exacerbations as adverse events in the placebo group (ten [29%] of 34) than in the tiotropium groups (five [14%] of 36 in the 2·5 µg group and two [6%] of 31 in the 5 µg group). Serious adverse events were reported in three patients (all of whom received placebo); no adverse events led to discontinuation of treatment or death. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, our small study is the first to assess the safety and efficacy of tiotropium in children aged 1-5 years with persistent asthmatic symptoms. Tolerability of tiotropium was similar to that of placebo, which is consistent with previous findings in older populations. Although mean daytime asthma symptom scores were not significantly different between groups, tiotropium showed the potential to reduce asthma exacerbation risk compared with placebo. The findings of the study are limited by the small sample size and descriptive statistical analyses. Additional well powered trials are needed to further assess the safety and efficacy of tiotropium in young children. FUNDING: Boehringer Ingelheim.

Pharmacodynamics and Pharmacokinetics Following Once-Daily and Twice-Daily Dosing of Tiotropium Respimat® in Asthma Using Standardized Sample-Contamination Avoidance.

BACKGROUND: This study was conducted to confirm the 24-hour bronchodilator efficacy and pharmacokinetic profile of once-daily tiotropium Respimat® 5 µg add-on to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in adults with symptomatic asthma. It used a trial protocol designed to minimize the risk of pharmacokinetic sample contamination resulting from improper sampling procedure, sample handling, or device handling during priming and subsequent inhalation procedure. METHODS: A Phase II, randomized, double-blind, two-way crossover study (NCT01696071) comparing two daily dosing regimens of tiotropium for 4 weeks, once-daily 5 µg (evening dosing) or twice-daily 2.5 µg (morning and evening dosing), as add-on to maintenance therapy with ICS (400-800 µg budesonide or equivalent) as controller medication. There was no washout between treatment periods. RESULTS: An increase in the area under the curve of the 24-hour forced expiratory volume in 1 second profile from study baseline was observed following once-daily tiotropium 5 µg (217 mL) and twice-daily 2.5 µg (219 mL), with no difference between the two regimens (-2 mL [95% confidence interval: -38, 34]). In a subset of the study population, total tiotropium exposure, expressed as area under the plasma concentration versus time curve over 24 hours, was comparable between dosing regimens. Unexpected tiotropium plasma levels were observed in two patients, possibly because of contamination. CONCLUSIONS: The observed bronchodilator efficacy over 24 hours was similar with once-daily tiotropium 5 µg and twice-daily 2.5 µg as add-on to ICS therapy, supporting the suitability of once-daily dosing to provide sustained improvements in lung function in adults with symptomatic asthma.

A randomised dose-ranging study of tiotropium Respimat® in children with symptomatic asthma despite inhaled corticosteroids.

BACKGROUND: A considerable number of children with asthma remain symptomatic despite treatment with inhaled corticosteroids, resulting in significant morbidity, reduced quality of life, increased healthcare costs and lost school days. The aim of our study was to assess the efficacy, safety and tolerability of once-daily tiotropium Respimat® 5 µg, 2.5 µg and 1.25 µg add-on to medium-dose inhaled corticosteroids, with or without a leukotriene modifier, in children aged 6-11 years with symptomatic asthma. METHODS: In this Phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled, incomplete-crossover, dose-ranging study, patients were randomised to receive three of the four treatments evaluated: once-daily tiotropium Respimat® 5 µg, 2.5 µg or 1.25 µg or placebo Respimat®, in the evening during the 12-week (three × 4-week) treatment period. RESULTS: In total, 76, 74, 75 and 76 patients aged 6-11 years received tiotropium Respimat® 5 µg, 2.5 µg, 1.25 µg and placebo Respimat®, respectively. For the primary end point (peak forced expiratory volume in 1 second measured within 3 hours post-dosing), the adjusted mean responses with tiotropium Respimat® 5 µg (272 mL), 2.5 µg (290 mL) and 1.25 µg (261 mL) were significantly greater than with placebo Respimat® (185 mL; p = 0.0002, p < 0.0001 and p = 0.0011, respectively). The safety and tolerability of all doses of tiotropium Respimat® were comparable with those of placebo Respimat®, with no serious adverse events and no events leading to discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: Tiotropium Respimat® add-on to medium-dose inhaled corticosteroids, with or without a leukotriene modifier, was efficacious in paediatric patients with symptomatic asthma and had comparable safety and tolerability with placebo Respimat®. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01383499.

Tiotropium in asthmatic adolescents symptomatic despite inhaled corticosteroids: a randomised dose-ranging study.

INTRODUCTION: Tiotropium, a once-daily long-acting anticholinergic agent, has been shown to be an efficacious and safe add-on treatment for adults with symptomatic asthma, despite treatment with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). A large proportion of asthmatic adolescents have symptomatic disease despite a wide range of therapeutic options. We investigated the efficacy and safety of three doses of tiotropium, administered in the evening (via Respimat(®) SoftMist™ inhaler), versus placebo in asthmatic adolescents symptomatic despite ICS treatment. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, incomplete crossover study evaluated once-daily tiotropium 5 µg, 2.5 µg and 1.25 µg versus placebo in three 4-week treatment periods. Primary efficacy end point was change in peak forced expiratory volume in 1 s within 3 h post-dose from baseline (peak FEV1(0-3h)). RESULTS: From 139 enrolled patients, 105 were randomised to receive one of four treatment sequences. Peak FEV1(0-3h) response for tiotropium 5 µg was significantly greater versus placebo (p = 0.0043). Trough FEV1 responses were significantly greater for tiotropium 5 µg (p < 0.00001) and 1.25 µg (p = 0.0134) versus placebo, but not for 2.5 µg (p = 0.0975), while FEV1 area under the curve(0-3h) responses were significant for all doses (p = 0.00001-0.0398). Overall incidence of adverse events was balanced across treatment groups, with no dose-dependent observations. The majority of adverse events were mild to moderate in intensity. CONCLUSION: This first study of tiotropium in adolescents with symptomatic asthma demonstrates that tiotropium is well tolerated and efficacious as add-on to maintenance treatment with ICS. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier; NCT01122680.

Tiotropium in asthma poorly controlled with standard combination therapy.

BACKGROUND: Some patients with asthma have frequent exacerbations and persistent airflow obstruction despite treatment with inhaled glucocorticoids and long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs). METHODS: In two replicate, randomized, controlled trials involving 912 patients with asthma who were receiving inhaled glucocorticoids and LABAs, we compared the effect on lung function and exacerbations of adding tiotropium (a total dose of 5 µg) or placebo, both delivered by a soft-mist inhaler once daily for 48 weeks. All the patients were symptomatic, had a post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) of 80% or less of the predicted value, and had a history of at least one severe exacerbation in the previous year. RESULTS: The patients had a mean baseline FEV(1) of 62% of the predicted value; the mean age was 53 years. At 24 weeks, the mean (±SE) change in the peak FEV(1) from baseline was greater with tiotropium than with placebo in the two trials: a difference of 86±34 ml in trial 1 (P=0.01) and 154±32 ml in trial 2 (P<0.001). The predose (trough) FEV(1) also improved in trials 1 and 2 with tiotropium, as compared with placebo: a difference of 88±31 ml (P=0.01) and 111±30 ml (P<0.001), respectively. The addition of tiotropium increased the time to the first severe exacerbation (282 days vs. 226 days), with an overall reduction of 21% in the risk of a severe exacerbation (hazard ratio, 0.79; P=0.03). No deaths occurred; adverse events were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with poorly controlled asthma despite the use of inhaled glucocorticoids and LABAs, the addition of tiotropium significantly increased the time to the first severe exacerbation and provided modest sustained bronchodilation. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim and Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00772538 and NCT00776984.).

Tiotropium improves lung function in patients with severe uncontrolled asthma: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Some patients with severe asthma remain symptomatic and obstructed despite maximal recommended treatment. Tiotropium, a long-acting inhaled anticholinergic agent, might be an effective bronchodilator in such patients. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the efficacy and safety of 2 doses of tiotropium (5 and 10 µg daily) administered through the Respimat inhaler with placebo as add-on therapy in patients with uncontrolled severe asthma (Asthma Control Questionnaire score, ≥ 1.5; postbronchodilator FEV1, ≤ 80% of predicted value) despite maintenance treatment with at least a high-dose inhaled corticosteroid plus a long-acting ß2-agonist. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, crossover study with three 8-week treatment periods. The primary end point was peak FEV1 at the end of each treatment period. RESULTS: Of 107 randomized patients (54% female patients; mean, 55 years of age; postbronchodilator FEV1, 65% of predicted value), 100 completed all periods. Peak FEV1 was significantly higher with 5 µg (difference, 139 mL; 95% CI, 96-181 mL) and 10 µg (difference, 170 mL; 95% CI, 128-213 mL) of tiotropium than with placebo (both P < .0001). There was no significant difference between the active doses. Trough FEV1 at the end of the dosing interval was higher with tiotropium (5 µg: 86 mL [95% CI, 41-132 mL]; 10 µg: 113 mL [95% CI, 67-159 mL]; both P < .0004). Daily home peak expiratory flow measurements were higher with both tiotropium doses. There were no significant differences in asthma-related health status or symptoms. Adverse events were balanced across groups except for dry mouth, which was more common on 10 µg of tiotropium. CONCLUSION: The addition of once-daily tiotropium to asthma treatment, including a high-dose inhaled corticosteroid plus a long-acting ß2-agonist, significantly improves lung function over 24 hours in patients with inadequately controlled, severe, persistent asthma.

Clinical trial of a leucotriene B4 receptor antagonist, BIIL 284, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Several clinical and experimental lines of evidence suggest that leucotriene B4 (LTB4), an arachidonic acid derivative with potent proinflammatory properties, plays a key role in the pathophysiology of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of BIIL 284, an oral long-acting LTB4 receptor antagonist, as monotherapy for the treatment of patients with active RA. METHODS: This was a multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of patients with active RA of 3 months' duration. A total of 342 patients were randomised to receive 5 mg, 25 mg or 75 mg of BIIL 284 or placebo. The primary end point was the percentage of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20. RESULTS: Although a higher percentage of ACR 20 responders was observed in the groups treated with 25 mg and 75 mg of BIIL 284 compared with those treated with placebo, no statistically significant differences were found between any of the three active treatment groups compared with the placebo group with regard to the primary or secondary end points. All trial treatments were safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: This clinical trial demonstrates that treatment of patients with active RA with a potent oral long-acting LTB4 receptor antagonist produced only modest improvements in disease activity. The results of this trial support the conclusion that LTB4 is not a major contributor to the inflammatory process in RA.

A randomized, double-blind clinical trial of two doses of meloxicam compared with naproxen in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: short- and long-term efficacy and safety results.

OBJECTIVE: In an international, multicenter, double-blind, randomized clinical trial we evaluated the short-term (3 months) and long-term (12 months) efficacy and safety of 2 different doses of meloxicam oral suspension compared with the efficacy and safety of naproxen oral suspension in children with oligoarticular-course (oligo-course) or polyarticular-course (poly-course) juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). METHODS: Children ages 2-16 years who had active oligo-course or poly-course JIA and who required therapy with a nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug were eligible for this trial. Patients were randomly allocated to receive therapy with meloxicam oral suspension, 0.125 mg/kg body weight in a single daily dose; meloxicam oral suspension, 0.25 mg/kg body weight in a single daily dose; or naproxen, 10 mg/kg body weight in 2 daily doses. The trial drugs were administered in a double-blind, double-dummy design for up to 12 months. Response rates were determined according to the American College of Rheumatology pediatric 30% improvement criteria (ACR pediatric 30). Safety parameters were assessed by evaluating the frequency of adverse events in the 3 groups. RESULTS: Of 232 patients enrolled, 225 received treatment, 6 were not eligible for randomization, and 1 randomized patient was not treated. One hundred eighty-two patients (81%) completed the 12-month treatment period. Response rates according to the ACR pediatric 30 criteria improved from month 3 to month 12, as follows: from 63% to 77% in the meloxicam 0.125 mg/kg group, from 58% to 76% in the meloxicam 0.25 mg/kg group, and from 64% to 74% in the naproxen group. No statistically significant differences in response rates were observed between the groups. There were no differences in the frequency of adverse events or abnormal laboratory values between the 3 groups. CONCLUSION: The short- and long-term safety and efficacy of meloxicam oral suspension appear to be comparable with the safety and efficacy of naproxen oral suspension in the treatment of oligo-course and poly-course JIA. The once-daily administration of meloxicam oral suspension might represent an improvement in the treatment of JIA.

Pharmacokinetics of intravenous, single-dose tiotropium in subjects with different degrees of renal impairment.

Tiotropium, a new potent anticholinergic bronchodilator, is excreted mainly by the kidney. To investigate the pharmacokinetics of tiotropium in renal impairment, the authors evaluated the pharmacokinetics and safety after administration of a single dose of intravenous tiotropium 4.8 microg, given as an infusion over 15 minutes in subjects with normal renal function and a wide range of renal impairment based on measured creatinine clearance (normal: > 80 mL/min, n = 6; mild impairment: > 50-80 mL/min, n = 5; moderate impairment: 30-50 mL/min, n = 7; severe impairment: < 30 mL/min, n =6). As expected for a drug excreted predominantly in unchanged form by the kidneys, tiotropium plasma concentrations increased as renal impairment worsened, with mean values of 55.5 (16.2 percent geometric coefficient of variation [%gCV]), 77.1 (20.1 %gCV), 101 (29.8 %gCV), and 108 (27.3 %gCV) pgh/mL for AUC(0-4h) in the normal renal function and the mild, moderate, and severe renal impairment groups, respectively. The percentage of tiotropium dose excreted unchanged in the urine decreased from 60.1% of dose (17.7 %gCV) to 59.3% (14.4 %gCV), 39.9% (34.5 %gCV), and 37.4% (10.2 %gCV) in the normal renal function and the mild, moderate, and severe renal impairment groups, respectively. Plasma protein binding of tiotropium did not significantly change in the renal-impaired subjects. Two subjects with normal renal function experienced headache 10 hours after the infusion, which was mild and transient. No adverse events occurred in subjects with renal impairment. There were no clinically relevant changes in blood pressure, pulse rate, 12-lead ECG, physical examination, hematology, or clinical chemistry, compared with baseline values, in any subject after intravenous administration of tiotropium. Tiotropium should only be used in patients with moderate to severe renal insufficiency if the potential benefit outweighs the potential risks.

Prescription and tolerability of meloxicam in day-to-day practice: postmarketing observational cohort study of 13,307 patients in Germany.

The goal of this study was to obtain data for prescription habits, tolerability for patients at high risk, and clinical effectiveness of meloxicam administered at 7.5 mg and 15 mg for various rheumatic diseases under real world prescribing conditions. This was a 3-month large-scale prospective observational cohort study in 4000 medical practices throughout Germany shortly after the introduction of meloxicam. To be eligible, patients had to have a diagnosis of acute or chronic active rheumatic disease for which nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID) therapy was required according to the prescribing information. In this study, 13,307 patients receiving meloxicam prescriptions (7.5 mg in 65% and 15 mg in 33%) were observed. The diagnoses of these patients included osteoarthritis (61%), rheumatoid arthritis (24%), ankylosing spondylitis (1.6%), and other rheumatic conditions (28%). A substantial proportion of high risk patients were enrolled: 12% with a previous history of a perforation, ulceration, and bleeding (PUB), 24% with at least one concomitant cardiovascular disorder, and 26% receiving concomitant antihypertensive medication. Many of the patients (58%) had received NSAIDs before meloxicam, including patients with insufficient prior treatment effectiveness (43%) and those with NSAID-related adverse drug reactions (21%). In 85% and 94% of the patients, respectively, effectiveness and tolerability were rated as good or very good. Quality of life and daily functions improved in 64% to 84% of the patients. Only 0.8% of the patients reported gastrointestinal (GI) adverse drug reactions. Four uncomplicated cases of gastric ulceration, one serious perforated gastric ulcer, and one serious ileus complication were reported after incorrect use or overdosing of meloxicam. Treatment with the selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor meloxicam in doses of 7.5 mg and 15 mg resulted in meaningful treatment responses under real life conditions, despite inclusion of a substantial number of patients with insufficient effectiveness of previous use of non-COX-2 selective NSAIDs. All major GI toxicity (PUB) observed was owing to the fact that prescribing conditions were not respected appropriately. Despite a selection of high risk patients overall, GI, cardiovascular, and renal tolerability was favorable.