Pitfalls of using video-EEG for a trial endpoint in children aged <4 years with focal seizures.

OBJECTIVE: Double-blind, randomized, and placebo-controlled trial SP0967 (NCT02477839/2013-000717-20) did not demonstrate superior efficacy of lacosamide versus placebo in patients aged ≥1 month to <4 years with uncontrolled focal seizures, per ≤72 h video-electroencephalogram (video-EEG)-based primary endpoints (reduction in average daily frequency of focal seizures at end-of-maintenance [EOM] versus end-of-baseline [EOB], patients with ≥50% response). This was unexpected because randomized controlled trial SP0969 (NCT01921205) showed efficacy of lacosamide in patients aged ≥4 to <17 years with uncontrolled focal seizures. SP0969's primary endpoint was based on seizure diary instead of video-EEG, an issue with the latter being inter-reader variability. We evaluated inter-reader agreement in video-EEG interpretation in SP0967, which to our knowledge, are the first such data for very young children with focal seizures from a placebo-controlled trial. METHODS: Local investigator and central reader agreement in video-EEG interpretation was analyzed post hoc. RESULTS: Analysis included 105 EOB and 98 EOM video-EEGs. Local investigators and central reader showed poor agreement based on ≥2 focal seizures at EOB (Kappa = 0.01), and fair agreement based on ≥2 focal seizures at EOM (Kappa = 0.23). Local investigator and central reader seizure count interpretations varied substantially, particularly for focal seizures, but also primary generalized and unclassified epileptic seizures, at both timepoints. INTERPRETATION: High inter-reader variability and low inter-reader reliability of the interpretation of seizure types and counts prevent confident conclusion regarding the lack of efficacy of lacosamide in this population. We recommend studies in very young children do not employ video-EEGs exclusively for accurate study inclusion or as an efficacy measure.

Long-term safety and tolerability of lacosamide monotherapy in patients with epilepsy: Results from a multicenter, open-label trial.

The primary objective of this trial (SP1042; NCT02582866) was to assess long-term safety and tolerability of lacosamide monotherapy (200-600 mg/day) in adults with focal (partial-onset) seizures or generalized tonic-clonic seizures (without clear focal origin). This Phase III, long-term, open-label, multicenter, follow-up trial enrolled patients with epilepsy who were taking lacosamide in, and completed, the previous double-blind trial (SP0994; NCT01465997). Primary safety outcomes were treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), discontinuations due to TEAEs, and serious TEAEs. One hundred and six patients were enrolled and received lacosamide: 84 (79.2%) completed the trial and 22 (20.8%) discontinued. The median duration of exposure was 854.0 days, with a median modal dose of 200 mg/day. Ninety-six (90.6%), 64 (60.4%), and 44 (41.5%) patients had ≥12, ≥24, and ≥36 months of lacosamide exposure, respectively. At least one TEAE was reported by 61 (57.5%) patients. The most common (≥4%) TEAEs were headache (10 [9.4%]), nasopharyngitis (eight [7.5%]), and back pain (five [4.7%]). One (0.9%) patient discontinued due to a TEAE (sudden unexpected death in epilepsy; not considered drug-related), 14 (13.2%) patients reported serious TEAEs, and seven (6.6%) patients reported TEAEs that were considered drug-related. Overall, long-term lacosamide monotherapy was generally well tolerated up to 600 mg/day, with no new safety signals identified.

Phase II Study of Eribulin Mesylate Administered Biweekly in Patients With Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-2-negative Metastatic Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC), whose disease progressed on prior chemotherapy, have a poor prognosis. Eribulin, a microtubule dynamics inhibitor, extends overall survival in previously treated MBC. The most common adverse event associated with eribulin is neutropenia, which may result in dose interruptions or reductions. A modified biweekly dosing schedule of eribulin was assessed for efficacy as well as improvements in hematologic toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this open-label, single-arm, multicenter, phase II study, previously treated (2-5 chemotherapy regimens for metastatic disease) patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative MBC received intravenous eribulin 1.4 mg/m2 over 2 to 5 minutes on days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle. The primary study endpoints were objective response rate (ORR; complete response [CR] + partial responses [PR]) and disease control rate (DCR; CR + PR + stable disease [SD]). RESULTS: Among 58 treated patients, the ORR was 12% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5%-24%), DCR (CR, n = 1; PR, n = 6; SD, n = 30) was 65%, and the median progression-free survival was 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.9-4.1 months). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was 31%; 50% of all patients, and 78% of patients with neutropenia (all grades), received hematopoietic growth-factor support. CONCLUSION: The efficacy and safety results obtained with a biweekly eribulin schedule in this phase II trial appear similar to those associated with the approved eribulin schedule (1.4 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle) reported in the EMBRACE study.

Long-term safety and efficacy of lacosamide and controlled-release carbamazepine monotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: A large-scale, double-blind trial (SP0993; NCT01243177) demonstrated that lacosamide was noninferior to controlled-release carbamazepine (carbamazepine-CR) in terms of efficacy, and well tolerated as first-line monotherapy in patients (≥16 years of age) with newly diagnosed epilepsy. We report primary safety outcomes from the double-blind extension of the noninferiority trial (SP0994; NCT01465997) and post hoc analyses of pooled long-term safety and efficacy data from both trials. METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to lacosamide or carbamazepine-CR. Doses were escalated (lacosamide: 200/400/600 mg/d; carbamazepine-CR: 400/800/1200 mg/d) based on seizure control. Eligible patients continued randomized treatment in the extension. Primary outcomes of the extension were treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious TEAEs, and discontinuations due to TEAEs. Post hoc analyses of data from combined trials included 12- and 24-month seizure freedom and TEAEs by number of comorbid conditions. RESULTS: A total of 886 patients were treated in the initial trial and 548 in the extension; 211 of 279 patients (75.6%) on lacosamide and 180/269 (66.9%) on carbamazepine-CR completed the extension. In the extension, 181 patients (64.9%) on lacosamide and 182 (67.7%) on carbamazepine-CR reported TEAEs; in both groups, nasopharyngitis, headache, and dizziness were most common. Serious TEAEs were reported by 32 patients (11.5%) on lacosamide and 22 (8.2%) on carbamazepine-CR; 12 (4.3%) and 21 (7.8%) discontinued due to TEAEs. In the combined trials (median exposure: lacosamide 630 days; carbamazepine-CR 589 days), Kaplan-Meier estimated proportions of patients with 12- and 24-month seizure freedom from first dose were 50.8% (95% confidence interval 46.2%-55.4%) and 47.0% (42.2%-51.7%) on lacosamide, and 54.9% (50.3%-59.6%) and 50.9% (46.0%-55.7%) on carbamazepine-CR. Incidences of drug-related TEAEs and discontinuations due to TEAEs increased by number of comorbid conditions and were lower in patients on lacosamide. SIGNIFICANCE: Long-term (median ~2 years) lacosamide monotherapy was efficacious and generally well tolerated in adults with newly diagnosed epilepsy. Seizure freedom rates were similar with lacosamide and carbamazepine-CR.

Oral antivirals for the acute treatment of recurrent herpes labialis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the use and benefit of oral antivirals in the acute treatment of episodic, recurrent herpes labialis. DATA SOURCES: A literature search was performed in MEDLINE (1966-August 2003) using acyclovir, famciclovir, valacyclovir, cold sores, herpes labialis, and HSV-1 as search terms. DATA SYNTHESIS: We reviewed 5 placebo-controlled and 2 comparative studies evaluating oral antivirals for acute treatment of recurrent herpes labialis. No studies directly compared different antivirals. Studies discussing the efficacy of antivirals for chronic suppression of herpes simplex virus-1 infection were not included. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with oral antivirals decreases the duration of lesion episodes and pain by approximately one day; however, the antivirals do not abort lesions from developing. Clinical implications of these results appear relatively modest.