Safety and efficacy of ozanezumab in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Neurite outgrowth inhibitor A (Nogo-A) is thought to have a role in the pathophysiology of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). A monoclonal antibody against Nogo-A showed a positive effect in the SOD1G93A mouse model of ALS, and a humanised form of this antibody (ozanezumab) was well tolerated in a first-in-human trial. Therefore, we aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of ozanezumab in patients with ALS. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial was done in 34 centres in 11 countries. Patients aged 18-80 years with a diagnosis of familial or sporadic ALS were randomly assigned (1:1), centrally according to a computer-generated allocation schedule, to receive ozanezumab (15 mg/kg) or placebo as intravenous infusions over 1 h every 2 weeks for 46 weeks, followed by assessments at week 48 and week 60. Patients and study personnel were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was a joint-rank analysis of function (ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised) and overall survival, analysed at 48 weeks in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01753076, and with GSK-ClinicalStudyRegister.com, NOG112264, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Dec 20, 2012, and Nov 1, 2013, we recruited 307 patients, of whom 303 were randomly assigned to receive placebo (n=151) or ozanezumab (n=152). The adjusted mean of the joint-rank score was -14·9 (SE 13·5) for the ozanezumab group and 15·0 (13·6) for the placebo group, with a least squares mean difference of -30·0 (95% CI -67·9 to 7·9; p=0·12). Overall, reported adverse events, serious adverse events, and adverse events leading to permanent discontinuation of study drug or withdrawal from study were similar between the treatment groups, except for dyspepsia (ten [7%] in the ozanezumab group vs four [3%] in the placebo group), depression (11 [7%] vs five [3%]), and diarrhoea (25 [16%] vs 12 [8%]). Respiratory failure was the most common serious adverse event (12 [8%] vs seven [5%]). At week 60, the number of deaths was higher in the ozanezumab group (20 [13%]) than in the placebo group (16 [11%]), mainly as a result of respiratory failure (ten [7%] vs five [3%]). Two deaths were considered related to the study drug (bladder transitional cell carcinoma in the ozanezumab group and cerebrovascular accident in the placebo group). INTERPRETATION: Ozanezumab did not show efficacy compared with placebo in patients with ALS. Therefore, Nogo-A does not seem to be an effective therapeutic target in ALS. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline.

Two randomized controlled trials of SB742457 in mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: Two previous studies of SB742457, a 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT6) receptor antagonist, suggested the efficacy of improvements in cognition and global outcome in Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS: Two randomized, placebo-controlled trials investigated SB742457 15 and 35 mg daily in subjects with mild-to-moderate AD (Mini-Mental Health State Examination [MMSE] 10-26). Study 1 (n = 576) investigated SB742457 and donepezil (5-10 mg daily) as monotherapy for 6 months. Study 2 (n = 684) investigated SB742457 in subjects who were maintained on donepezil. Coprimary endpoints at 24 weeks assessed cognition (AD Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale [ADAS-Cog]) and global outcome (Study 1: Clinician Interview-Based Impression of Change Plus Caregiver Input [CIBIC+]; Study 2: Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes [CDR-SB]). Safety was assessed throughout. RESULTS: Both studies failed to achieve formal statistical significance for their primary objectives. Study 1: SB742457 monotherapy was not statistically significantly different from placebo on any endpoint. Donepezil improved CIBIC+ but not ADAS-Cog. Study 2: SB742457 35 mg showed statistically significant differences relative to placebo for ADAS-cog (weeks 12, 24, and 48, but not week 36), ADCS-ADL (weeks 12-36, but not week 48), and CDR-SB (week 12 only). CONCLUSION: Neither study met the overall criteria for success, but as an adjunct to donepezil, SB742457 was associated with sustained improvements for up to 48 weeks in cognition and ADL, compared with donepezil alone.Clinical Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov: Study 1 NCT00708552; Study 2 NCT00710684.

Efficacy and tolerability of sumatriptan tablets in a fast-disintegrating, rapid-release formulation for the acute treatment of migraine: results of a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Sumatriptan tablets have been developed in a fast-disintegrating, rapid-release formulation designed to facilitate tablet disintegration and drug dispersion and to potentially mitigate the effects of gastric stasis that can accompany migraine. OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of sumatriptan 50- and 100-mg tablets in a fast-disintegrating, rapid-release formulation compared with those of placebo in patients with migraine. METHODS: This clinical trial had a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group design. Exclusion criteria included >6 migraines monthly during either of the 2 months before screening; uncontrolled hypertension; suspected or confirmed cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease; and ophthalmic, basilar, or hemiplegic migraine. Sumatriptan 50 and 100 mg and placebo were taken on an outpatient basis during the mild-pain phase of a single migraine attack. Patients recorded details of the treated migraine on a diary card and rated pain severity immediately before dosing and 30 minutes, 45 minutes, 1 hour, and 2 hours after dosing using a 4-point scale (from 0 = none to 3 = severe). The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of patients who were pain free 2 hours after dosing. Additional efficacy end points were the proportion of patients who were pain free at 30 minutes, 45 minutes, and 1 hour after dosing; the proportion who were migraine free through 2 hours after dosing; and the proportion with a sustained pain-free response. RESULTS: Patients' mean age ranged from 39.7 to 41.5 years across the 3 groups, and the majority were women (79.7%-85.9%) and white (98.7%-100%). One hundred thirty-seven patients received sumatriptan 50 mg, 142 sumatriptan 100 mg, and 153 placebo. In the intent-to-treat population (n = 432), 51.1% of patients who received sumatriptan 50 mg and 66.2% of patients who received sumatriptan 100 mg were pain free 2 hours after dosing, compared with 19.6% of the placebo group (P < 0.001, each sumatriptan dose vs placebo). In an exploratory analysis, the 2-hour pain-free rate with sumatriptan 100 mg was significantly better than that with sumatriptan 50 mg (P = 0.007). Significantly more patients who received sumatriptan 100 mg were pain free compared with placebo at 30 minutes (P < 0.01), 45 minutes (P < 0.001), and 1 hour after dosing (P < 0.001); similar pain-free results were observed in patients who received sumatriptan 50 mg at 45 minutes (P < 0.05) and 1 hour (P = 0.01). In the per-protocol population (n = 313), pain-free efficacy 2 hours after dosing was 52.7% with sumatriptan 50 mg and 74.8% with sumatriptan 100 mg, compared with 21.0% with placebo (P < 0.001, each sumatriptan dose vs placebo). These rates were greater than those in the overall study population, approximately 12.0% of whom treated moderate or severe pain. The only drug-related adverse events reported in >/=3% of patients in any treatment group were nausea and vomiting (<1%, 5%, and 2% in the sumatriptan 50 and 100 mg and placebo groups, respectively), chest symptoms (2%, 3%, and 0%), and malaise and fatigue (1%, 3%, and <1%). No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, sumatriptan tablets in a fast-disintegrating, rapid-release oral formulation provided pain-free efficacy in the acute treatment of migraine. Efficacy was maximized with the 100-mg dose compared with the 50-mg dose, and by treating early when pain was mild. In the intent-to-treat population, 51.1% of patients who received sumatriptan 50 mg and 66.2% of those who received sumatriptan 100 mg were pain free 2 hours after dosing. In the per-protocol population, 3 of 4 patients taking the 100-mg tablets for mild pain within 1 hour of its onset were pain free at 2 hours. Sumatriptan tablets were generally well tolerated.

Effects of a fast disintegrating/rapid release oral formulation of sumatriptan on functional ability in patients with migraine.

BACKGROUND: A new oral form of sumatriptan has been developed to facilitate tablet disintegration and drug dispersion and to mitigate the effects of gastric stasis that can accompany migraine. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects on functional ability of the new fast disintegrating/rapid release formulation of sumatriptan. METHODS: Sumatriptan 50 mg (n = 137), 100 mg (n = 142), or placebo (n = 153) was administered early when pain was mild for the acute treatment of a single migraine attack in a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled clinical trial. For this report, main health-outcomes endpoints (which were secondary endpoints for this clinical trial that was primarily designed to assess pain-free efficacy) included functional ability measured through 2 h postdose on a 5-point scale and lost time equivalents, a composite measure of migraine-associated time missed from activities, and reduced effectiveness at activities through 24 h postdose. RESULTS: Normal functional ability was restored in a significantly (p < 0.05) greater percentage of patients treated with sumatriptan than placebo beginning 45 min postdose for sumatriptan 100 mg and 1 h postdose for sumatriptan 50 mg. During the 24 h after initial dosing, the median (range) lost time equivalents for the combination of paid work activities and activities outside of paid work were significantly lower in the groups treated with sumatriptan (1.1 [0-10] sumatriptan 100 mg; 0.8 [0-36] sumatriptan 50 mg) compared with placebo (2.9 [0-24]) (p < or = 0.01 each sumatriptan group versus placebo). The corresponding mean +/- SD values for lost time equivalents were 1.9 +/- 2.3 and 2.5 +/- 4.7 for sumatriptan 100 mg and 50 mg, respectively, compared with 3.5 +/- 4.3 for placebo. CONCLUSION: A new oral sumatriptan formulation confers rapid, sustained restoration of functional ability in the acute treatment of migraine so that patients can return rapidly to normal functioning at work and outside of work.

Pharmacokinetic profile of a new form of sumatriptan tablets in healthy volunteers.

OBJECTIVE: Rapid delivery of migraine-specific medication to its site(s) of action is thought to be crucial in preventing or minimizing sensitization of central pain pathways and thereby in optimizing pain-free outcomes in patients with migraine. Sumatriptan has been developed as a new tablet formulation to enhance the rate of systemic drug delivery by improving tablet disintegration and drug dispersion relative to those of conventional tablets. These enhanced formulation characteristics may be beneficial during occurrences of the gastric stasis that can accompany migraine. METHODS: This randomized, open-label, 4-way crossover study (n = 32) was conducted to determine whether the new formulation of sumatriptan 50 and 100 mg is bioequivalent to sumatriptan conventional tablets and to compare the pharmacokinetic profiles of the new formulation and the conventional tablet during the early (0-2 h) postdose interval in healthy volunteers. Pharmacokinetics during the early post-dose interval are important in determining a drug's onset of action, an important parameter to patients with migraine. RESULTS: The results confirm that the new formulation of sumatriptan and sumatriptan conventional tablets are bioequivalent as demonstrated by the finding that the 90% confidence intervals for the sumatriptan area under the concentration time curve to infinity and to the last evaluable time point (AUC(0- infinity ) and AUC(0-t), respectively) and maximum plasma concentration (C(max)) fell within the predetermined bounds defining bioequivalence (0.80-1.25) for both doses. Pharmacokinetic parameters measured early (0-2 h) after dosing reveal slightly faster absorption, on average, of the new sumatriptan formulation than sumatriptan conventional tablets although high intersubject variability was observed. For the new sumatriptan formulation, AUC(0-2) (AUC up to 2 h post dose) was, on average, 1% greater (50 mg) and 8% greater (100 mg) and maximal sumatriptan levels were attained, on average, 10 min earlier (50 mg) and 15 min earlier (100 mg) compared with the conventional tablet. Other measures including AUC(0-0.5) (AUC to 30 min post-dose), times to achieve sumatriptan concentrations of 5 and 10 ng/mL, and mean percentage C(max) 15, 20 and 30 min post-dose demonstrate an observable improvement in rate of drug absorption for the new form of sumatriptan compared with conventional tablets. CONCLUSION: The new form of sumatriptan is bioequivalent to sumatriptan conventional tablets and is absorbed more quickly than conventional tablets.

Evaluation of GW406381 for treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: two randomized, controlled studies.

CONTEXT: GW406381 is an investigational, highly selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor that is effective in animal models of central sensitization and of inflammatory pain. OBJECTIVE: To examine dose response for efficacy and safety of GW406381 in adults with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. DESIGN: Two randomized, double-blind, placebo- and positive-control studies: Study A, a 6-week nonflare design; Study B, a 12-week flare design. PATIENTS: 649 patients entered Study A; 1331 patients entered Study B. STUDY A: GW406381 10, 20, 35, or 50 mg, celecoxib 200 mg, or placebo. Study B: GW406381 1, 5, 10, 25, or 50 mg, celecoxib 200 mg, or placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Study A, co-primary endpoints were change from baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain subscore and WOMAC question 1. Study B co-primary endpoints were change from baseline in WOMAC pain and function subscores and Patient Global Assessment of Arthritis Condition. A closed hierarchical test procedure was prespecified. RESULTS: Study A demonstrated that GW406381 50 mg was superior to placebo on WOMAC pain subscore (mean difference from placebo -6.9 mm; P= .012). No clear dose response was observed, and the results with celecoxib were no different from those of placebo. In Study B, no dose of GW406381 was superior to placebo on the co-primary endpoints. Celecoxib was superior to placebo on all co-primary endpoints. Dose-related blood pressure and renovascular effects were seen with GW406381. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, clinically meaningful efficacy in pain related to OA of the knee was not demonstrated for GW406381 despite its peripheral and central sites of action.