Deflazacort vs prednisone treatment for Duchenne muscular dystrophy: A meta-analysis of disease progression rates in recent multicenter clinical trials.

INTRODUCTION: In this study we characterized disease progression over 48 weeks among boys receiving deflazacort vs prednisone/prednisolone placebo arm treatment in two recent Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) clinical trials. METHODS: Ambulatory boys with DMD receiving placebo in the phase 3 ataluren (N = 115) and tadalafil (N = 116) trials were included. The trials required at least 6 months of prior corticosteroid use and stable baseline dosing. Associations between corticosteroid use and 48-week changes in ambulatory function were estimated using mixed models. Adjusted differences between corticosteroid groups were pooled in a meta-analysis. RESULTS: In the meta-analysis, deflazacort-treated patients vs prednisone/prednisolone-treated patients experienced, on average, lower declines of 28.3 meters on 6-minute walk distance (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.7, 50.9; 2.9 seconds on rise from supine [95% CI, 0.9, 4.9 seconds]; 2.3 seconds on 4-stair climb [95% CI, 0.5, 4.1 seconds]; and 2.9 [95% CI, 0.1, 5.8] points on the North Star Ambulatory Assessment linearized score). DISCUSSION: Deflazacort-treated patients experienced significantly lower functional decline over 48 weeks.

Pharmacokinetics and safety of tadalafil in a paediatric population with pulmonary arterial hypertension: A multiple ascending-dose study.

AIMS: To evaluate the pharmacokinetics and safety of once-daily (QD) tadalafil in paediatric patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) to establish an appropriate dose range for further research. METHODS: This was an open-label, multicentre, international, multiple-ascending-dose study. Patients aged ≥2 years were enrolled into 1 of 3 cohorts based on body weight: heavy-weight (≥40 kg), middle-weight (25 to <40 kg), and light-weight (<25 kg). Each patient received tadalafil QD for 10 weeks: 5 weeks at a low dose, then 5 weeks at a high dose. The doses for each cohort were intended to produce plasma tadalafil concentrations within the range produced by 5-10 mg (for the low dose) or 20-40 mg (for the high dose) of tadalafil in adults with PAH. Area under the plasma concentration-time curve during 1 dosing interval (AUCτ ), maximum concentration, and apparent clearance were assessed throughout the trial, as were safety and tolerability. RESULTS: The study enrolled 19 patients aged 2-17 years, weighing 9.9-76.0 kg. Tadalafil's median (range) steady-state AUCτ at the high dose was 7243 (3131-13 088) ng•h/mL across all patients. Concentrations were higher in no bosentan-treated patients than in bosentan-treated patients, but both populations were within the range of respective adult patients taking 20-40 mg QD. Tadalafil had an acceptable safety profile consistent with the known safety profile of tadalafil in adults. CONCLUSIONS: Tadalafil 40 mg QD for patients ≥40 kg, and 20 mg QD for patients <40 kg and aged ≥2 years, are suitable for further research in paediatric patients with PAH.

Baseline characteristics and hospitalizations in patients with schizophrenia receiving olanzapine long-acting injection: an interim analysis from a non-interventional, prospective observational safety study.

BACKGROUND: Depot antipsychotics are a treatment option for medication nonadherence in patients with schizophrenia. Nonadherence can lead to increased relapse and hospitalization rates. This article reports hospitalization data before and after initiation of olanzapine long-acting injection (LAI), a depot antipsychotic. METHODS: Data were assessed from an ongoing, multinational, prospective, observational post-authorisation safety study being conducted to evaluate post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome (PDSS), an adverse reaction that can occur following injection of olanzapine LAI. Eligible patients were aged ≥18 years, diagnosed with schizophrenia, were prescribed olanzapine LAI, and lived outside the United States. Psychiatric hospitalization and medication data were collected retrospectively for the 6-month period before study entry and prospectively throughout the study. Paired t-tests and McNemar's tests were used to assess changes in hospitalization incidence and duration. Stepwise Cox proportional hazards models assessed factors associated with hospitalizations. Analyses were based on data from the first 3 years of the continuously enrolling study (N = 668). RESULTS: The average duration of olanzapine LAI exposure for all patients was 0.768 years. Of the 529 patients who received at least 1 injection of olanzapine LAI and were not hospitalized at study entry, 8.1% had at least 1 subsequent psychiatric hospitalization with a mean duration of 2.0 days. Of the 288 patients who had a >6-month follow-up, 8.3% had at least 1 post-baseline psychiatric hospitalization with a mean duration of 2.3 days. The incidence of hospitalizations in the 6-month period after treatment was significantly lower than that in the 6-month period prior to treatment (8.3 vs 32.6%, respectively; P < 0.001). Furthermore, mean hospitalization duration decreased from 11.5 days in the 6-month period before treatment to 2.3 days in the 6-month period after treatment (P < 0.001). Psychiatric hospitalization in the prior 12 months (P < 0.0001) and recreational drug use within 24 h of baseline visit (P = 0.015) were identified as potential predictors of time to first psychiatric hospitalization after beginning to take olanzapine LAI. At the time of interim analysis, 5 PDSS events had occurred, which was too few for a full analysis of those events. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate a significant reduction in the incidence and days of hospitalization from the 6-month period before to the 6-month period after olanzapine LAI initiation, which suggests reduced relapse and hospitalization during treatment. Results should be interpreted with caution due to the observational nature of the study and use of retrospective baseline data.

Investigation of the Effect of Lasmiditan on the Pharmacokinetics of P-Glycoprotein and Breast Cancer Resistance Protein Substrates.

Lasmiditan is an in vitro inhibitor of P-glycoprotein (P-gp) and breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP) efflux transporters. We aimed to confirm predictions from physiologically based pharmacokinetic models of lasmiditan, and assess the safety and tolerability of rosuvastatin and dabigatran co-administered with lasmiditan. In this open-label, post-marketing drug-drug interaction, phase 1 clinical trial, eligible participants were adults aged 21-70 years with a body mass index of 18.5-35.0 kg/m2 . Part 1 (P-gp, 150 mg dabigatran etexilate with 200 mg lasmiditan) and part 2 (BCRP, 10 mg rosuvastatin with 200 mg lasmiditan) employed similar designs: a single dose of probe substrate administered on day -2 with pharmacokinetic evaluation; 1-week washout; lasmiditan administered on days 8 and 9 alone; lasmiditan co-administered with a single dose of probe substrate on day 10, with pharmacokinetic evaluation of probe substrate and lasmiditan. Sixty-six participants were included in part 1 and 30 participants were included in part 2. Following dabigatran co-administration with lasmiditan, versus dabigatran alone, 90% confidence intervals for geometric least-squares (LS) mean ratios of area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 extrapolated to infinity (AUC0-∞ ) and maximum observed drug concentration (Cmax ) were not contained within the non-effect boundaries (0.80 to 1.25). Dabigatran AUC0-∞ increased by 25% and Cmax increased by 22%. The median time of maximum observed drug concentration (tmax ) for dabigatran was 2.0 to 3.0 hours. Following rosuvastatin co-administration with lasmiditan, versus rosuvastatin alone, 90%CIs for geometric LS mean ratios of AUC0-∞ and Cmax were contained within non-effect boundaries (0.80-1.25). Rosuvastatin AUC0-∞ increased by 15% and Cmax increased by 7%. The median tmax for rosuvastatin was 4.0 hours. Results suggest that lasmiditan has a weak effect on P-gp substrates and no clinically relevant effect on BCRP substrates.

Comparison of strain-gage and fiber-optic goniometry for measuring knee kinematics during activities of daily living and exercise.

There is increasing interest in wearable sensor technology as a tool for rehabilitation applications in community or home environments. Recent studies have focused on evaluating inertial based sensing (accelerometers, gyroscopes, etc.) that provide only indirect measures of joint motion. Measurement of joint kinematics using flexible goniometry is more direct, and still popular in laboratory environments, but has received little attention as a potential tool for wearable systems. The aim of this study was to compare two goniometric devices: a traditional strain-gauge flexible goniometer, and a fiberoptic flexible goniometer, for measuring dynamic knee flexion/extension angles during activity of daily living: chair rise, and gait; and exercise: deep knee bends, against joint angles computed from a "gold standard" Vicon motion tracking system. Six young adults were recruited to perform the above activities in the lab while wearing a goniometer on each knee, and reflective markers for motion tracking. Kinematic data were collected simultaneously from the goniometers (one on each leg) and the motion tracking system (both legs). The results indicate that both goniometers were within 2-5 degrees of the Vicon angles for gait and chair rise. For some deep knee bend trials, disagreement with Vicon angles exceeded ten degrees for both devices. We conclude that both goniometers can record ADL knee movement faithfully and accurately, but should be carefully considered when high (>120 deg) knee flexion angles are required.

Effects of Hepatic Impairment on the Pharmacokinetics of the Dual GIP and GLP-1 Receptor Agonist Tirzepatide.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Tirzepatide, a novel, once-weekly, dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, is approved in the US as a treatment for type 2 diabetes and is under development for long-term weight management, heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. This study evaluated the pharmacokinetics and tolerability of tirzepatide in participants with hepatic impairment (with or without type 2 diabetes) versus healthy participants with normal hepatic function. METHODS: Participants in this parallel, single-dose, open-label study were categorized by hepatic impairment defined by the baseline Child-Pugh (CP) score A (mild impairment; n = 6), B (moderate impairment; n = 6), or C (severe impairment; n = 7) or normal hepatic function (n = 13). All participants received a single subcutaneous 5-mg dose of tirzepatide. Blood samples were collected to determine tirzepatide plasma concentrations to estimate pharmacokinetic parameters. The primary pharmacokinetic parameters of area under the drug concentration-time curve from zero to infinity (AUC0-∞) and maximum observed drug concentration (Cmax) were evaluated using an analysis of covariance. The geometric least-squares means (LSM) and mean ratios for each group, between control and hepatic impairment levels, and the corresponding 90% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. The analysis of the time to maximum observed drug concentration was based on a nonparametric method. The relationships between the pharmacokinetic parameters and CP classification parameters (serum albumin level, total bilirubin level, and international normalized ratio) were also assessed. Adverse events were monitored to assess safety and tolerability. RESULTS: Tirzepatide exposure, based on AUC0-∞ and Cmax, was similar across the control and hepatic impairment groups. Statistical analysis showed no difference in the geometric LSM AUC0-∞ or Cmax between participants in the control group and the hepatic impairment groups, with the 90% CI for the ratios of geometric LSM spanning unity (AUC0-∞ ratio of geometric LSM vs control [90% CI 1.08 [0.879, 1.32], 0.960 [0.790, 1.17], and 0.852 [0.699, 1.04] and Cmax ratio of geometric LSM vs control [90% CI]: 0.916 [0.726, 1.16], 1.00 [0.802, 1.25], and 0.972 [0.784, 1.21] for mild, moderate and severe hepatic impairment groups, respectively). There was no change in median time to Cmax of tirzepatide across all groups (time to Cmax median difference vs control [90% CI]: 0 [- 4.00, 12.00], 0 [- 12.00, 12.00], and 0 [- 11.83, 4.17], respectively). There was no significant relationship between the exposure of tirzepatide and the CP score (p > 0.1 for AUC0-∞, Cmax, and apparent total body clearance). Similarly, there was no clinically relevant relationship between the exposure of tirzepatide and serum albumin level, total bilirubin level, or international normalized ratio. The geometric LSM half-life values were also similar across the control and hepatic impairment groups. No notable differences in safety profiles were observed between participants with hepatic impairment and healthy control participants. CONCLUSIONS: Tirzepatide pharmacokinetics was similar in participants with varying degrees of hepatic impairment compared with healthy participants. Thus, people with hepatic impairment treated with tirzepatide may not require dose adjustments. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier number NCT03940742.

Effects of Renal Impairment on the Pharmacokinetics of the Dual GIP and GLP-1 Receptor Agonist Tirzepatide.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The pharmacokinetics (PK) and single-dose tolerability of tirzepatide, a dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist being developed for once-weekly treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D), weight management, and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, was evaluated in subjects with renal impairment versus healthy subjects with normal renal function. METHODS: Forty-five subjects, categorized by baseline renal status, i.e. mild (n = 8, estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] 60-89 mL/min/1.73m2), moderate (n = 8, eGFR 30-59 mL/min/1.73m2), severe renal impairment (n = 7, eGFR < 30 mL/min/1.73m2), end-stage renal disease requiring dialysis (n = 8), and normal renal function (n = 14, eGFR ≥ 90 mL/min/1.73m2), received a single subcutaneous dose of tirzepatide 5 mg. Tirzepatide plasma concentrations up to 648 h postdose were measured to compute PK parameters. The primary analysis evaluated the ratios of area under the plasma concentration-time curves (AUCs) and maximum plasma drug concentration (Cmax) of renal impairment versus the normal renal function group (90% confidence interval [CI]). In addition, the relationship between PK parameters and continuous variables of renal function was assessed by linear regression. RESULTS: Tirzepatide exposure was similar across renal impairment groups and healthy subjects. The 90% CI of ratios of AUCs and Cmax comparing each renal impairment group versus normal renal function spanned unity, except for a 25-29% increase in AUCs in the moderate renal impairment group. There was no significant relationship between tirzepatide exposure and eGFR. Few adverse events were reported across the renal impairment and normal renal function groups. The majority were mild in severity and of a gastrointestinal nature in the renal impairment groups. CONCLUSION: There were no clinically relevant effects of renal impairment on tirzepatide PK. Dose adjustment may not be required for patients with renal impairment. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03482024.

Lanabecestat: Neuroimaging results in early symptomatic Alzheimer's disease.

INTRODUCTION: Lanabecestat, a beta-site amyloid precursor protein-cleaving enzyme 1 (BACE1) inhibitor, was investigated as a potential Alzheimer's disease (AD)-modifying treatment. As previously reported, amyloid beta (Aß) neuritic plaque burden reduction did not result in clinical benefit. Lanabecestat's effects on neuroimaging biomarkers and correlations between neuroimaging biomarkers and efficacy measures are reported. METHODS: AMARANTH and DAYBREAK-ALZ were 104- and 78-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of lanabecestat in early symptomatic AD (AMARANTH) and mild AD dementia (DAYBREAK-ALZ). Patients randomly (1:1:1) received placebo, lanabecestat 20 mg, or lanabecestat 50 mg daily (AMARANTH, n = 2218; DAYBREAK-ALZ, n = 1722). Florbetapir positron emission tomography (PET), fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET, flortaucipir PET, and volumetric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were used to measure Aß neuritic plaque burden, cerebral metabolism, aggregated tau neurofibrillary tangles, and brain volume, respectively. Additionally, florbetapir perfusion scans were performed in DAYBREAK-ALZ. Efficacy measures included 13-item Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale, Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study Activities of Daily Living Inventory, Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes, Functional Activities Questionnaire, and Mini-Mental State Examination. These studies stopped early due to futility. RESULTS: Despite previously observed annualized reduction in Aß neuritic plaque burden, there were no treatment differences in annualized change of aggregated tau neurofibrillary tangle burden (AMARANTH, n = 284; DAYBREAK-ALZ, n = 70), cerebral metabolism (AMARANTH, n = 260; DAYBREAK-ALZ, n = 38) and perfusion (DAYBREAK-ALZ, n = 213). Greater brain volume reduction (AMARANTH, n = 1697 [whole brain]; DAYBREAK-ALZ, n = 650 [whole brain]) occurred on lanabecestat compared to placebo. Higher baseline aggregated tau neurofibrillary tangle burden, lower cerebral metabolism, and lower brain volumes correlated with poorer baseline efficacy scores and greater clinical worsening. Lower baseline cerebral perfusion correlated with poorer baseline efficacy scores. Reduction in cerebral metabolism or whole brain volume correlated with clinical worsening, regardless of treatment assignment. DISCUSSION: Tau pathology and cerebral metabolism assessments showed no evidence of lanabecestat slowing pathophysiologic progression of AD. Lanabecestat exposure was associated with brain volume reductions. Correlations between imaging measures and cognitive assessments may aid future study design.

Prognostic factors for changes in the timed 4-stair climb in patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy, and implications for measuring drug efficacy: A multi-institutional collaboration.

The timed 4-stair climb (4SC) assessment has been used to measure function in Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) practice and research. We sought to identify prognostic factors for changes in 4SC, assess their consistency across data sources, and the extent to which prognostic scores could be useful in DMD clinical trial design and analysis. Data from patients with DMD in the placebo arm of a phase 3 trial (Tadalafil DMD trial) and two real-world sources (Universitaire Ziekenhuizen, Leuven, Belgium [Leuven] and Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center [CCHMC]) were analyzed. One-year changes in 4SC completion time and velocity (stairs/second) were analyzed. Prognostic models included age, height, weight, steroid use, and multiple timed function tests and were developed using multivariable regression, separately in each data source. Simulations were used to quantify impacts on trial sample size requirements. Data on 1-year changes in 4SC were available from the Tadalafil DMD trial (n = 92) Leuven (n = 67), and CCHMC (n = 212). Models incorporating multiple timed function tests, height, and weight significantly improved prognostic accuracy for 1-year change in 4SC (R2: 29%-36% for 4SC velocity, and 29%-34% for 4SC time) compared to models including only age, baseline 4SC and steroid duration (R2:8%-17% for 4SC velocity and 2%-13% for 4SC time). Measures of walking and rising ability contributed important prognostic information for changes in 4SC. In a randomized trial with equal allocation to treatment and placebo, adjustment for such a prognostic score would enable detection (at 80% power) of a treatment effect of 0.25 stairs/second with 100-120 patients, compared to 170-190 patients without prognostic score adjustment. Combining measures of ambulatory function doubled prognostic accuracy for 1-year changes in 4SC completion time and velocity. Randomized clinical trials incorporating a validated prognostic score could reduce sample size requirements by approximately 40%. Knowledge of important prognostic factors can also inform adjusted comparisons to external controls.

Efficacy and Safety of Lanabecestat for Treatment of Early and Mild Alzheimer Disease: The AMARANTH and DAYBREAK-ALZ Randomized Clinical Trials.

Importance: Alzheimer disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by cognitive deterioration and impaired activities of daily living. Current treatments provide only minor symptomatic improvements with limited benefit duration. Lanabecestat, a brain-permeable inhibitor of human beta-site amyloid precursor protein-cleaving enzyme 1 (BACE1/ß-secretase), was developed to modify the clinical course of AD by slowing disease progression. Objective: To assess whether lanabecestat slows the progression of AD compared with placebo in patients with early AD (mild cognitive impairment) and mild AD dementia. Design, Setting, and Participants: AMARANTH (first patient visit on September 30, 2014; last patient visit on October 4, 2018) and DAYBREAK-ALZ (first patient visit on July 1, 2016; last patient visit on September 28, 2018) were randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 2/3 and phase 3 clinical trials lasting 104 weeks and 78 weeks, respectively. AMARANTH and DAYBREAK-ALZ were multicenter, global, double-blind studies conducted at 257 and 251 centers, respectively, located in 15 and 18 countries or territories, respectively. A population-based sample of men and women aged 55 to 85 years who met National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association criteria for early AD or mild AD dementia was screened using cognitive assessments, and the presence of amyloid was confirmed. Patients were excluded for unstable medical conditions or medication use, significant cerebrovascular pathologic findings, or a history of vitiligo and/or current evidence of postinflammatory hypopigmentation. AMARANTH screened 6871 patients; 2218 (32.3%) were randomized, and 539 patients completed the study. DAYBREAK-ALZ screened 5706 patients; 1722 (30.2%) were randomized, and 76 patients completed the study. Interventions: Patients were randomized (1:1:1) to once-daily oral doses of lanabecestat (20 mg), lanabecestat (50 mg), or placebo. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome measure was change from baseline on the 13-item Alzheimer Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale. Secondary outcomes included Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Inventory, Clinical Dementia Rating, Functional Activities Questionnaire, Mini-Mental State Examination, and Neuropsychiatric Inventory. Efficacy analyses were conducted on the intent-to-treat population. Results: Among 2218 AMARANTH patients, the mean (SD) age was 71.3 (7.1) years, and 1177 of 2218 (53.1%) were women. Among 1722 DAYBREAK-ALZ patients, the mean (SD) age was 72.3 (7.0) years, and 1023 of 1722 (59.4%) were women. Both studies were terminated early after futility analysis. There were no consistent, reproducible dose-related findings on primary or secondary efficacy measures. Psychiatric adverse events, weight loss, and hair color changes were reported in a higher percentage of patients receiving lanabecestat than placebo. Conclusions and Relevance: Treatment with lanabecestat was well tolerated and did not slow cognitive or functional decline. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT02245737 and NCT02783573.

Quality of life in children and adolescents with bipolar I depression treated with olanzapine/fluoxetine combination.

BACKGROUND: We examined the efficacy of olanzapine/fluoxetine combination (OFC) in improving health-related quality of life (QoL) in the treatment of bipolar depression in children and adolescents. METHODS: Patients aged 10-17 years with bipolar I disorder, depressed episode, baseline children's depression rating scale-revised (CDRS-R) total score ≥40, Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score ≤15, and YMRS-item 1 ≤ 2 were randomized to OFC (6/25-12/50 mg/day olanzapine/fluoxetine; n = 170) or placebo (n = 85) for up to 8 weeks of double-blind treatment. Patients and parents completed the revised KINDL questionnaire for measuring health-related QoL in children and adolescents (KINDL-R) at baseline and endpoint. The mean change in CDRS-R total and item scores were used to compare improvement in symptomatology in patients taking OFC and placebo. Tests were 2-sided using a Type I error cutoff of 0.05, and no adjustments for multiple comparisons were made. RESULTS: Baseline QoL as measured by the KINDL-R was substantially impaired relative to published norms for a healthy school-based sample. OFC-treated patients demonstrated an improvement over placebo at endpoint with respect to mean change from baseline in the patient-rated KINDL-R Self-esteem subscale score (p = 0.028), and in the parent KINDL-R ratings of emotional well-being (p = 0.020), Self-esteem (p = 0.030), and Family (p = 0.006). At endpoint, OFC-treated patients still had a lower QoL compared to the normative population. OFC showed significant improvement (p ≤ 0.05) versus placebo on the CDRS-R total score and on 7 of the 17 CDRS-R items. CONCLUSIONS: Patients aged 10-17 years with an acute episode of bipolar depression and their parents reported greater improvements (parents noticed improvements in more areas than did their offspring) on some aspects of QoL when treated with OFC compared with placebo. However, after 8 weeks of treatment, KINDL-R endpoint scores remained lower than those of the, presumably healthy, control population. Clinical trial registration information A Study for Assessing Treatment of Patients Ages 10-17 with Bipolar Depression; http://www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT00844857.

Postinjection delirium/sedation syndrome in patients with schizophrenia receiving olanzapine long-acting injection: results from a large observational study.

BACKGROUND: Postinjection delirium/sedation syndrome (PDSS) has been reported uncommonly during treatment with olanzapine long-acting injection (LAI), a sustained-release formulation of olanzapine. AIMS: The primary aim of the study was to estimate the incidence per injection and per patient of PDSS events in adult patients with schizophrenia who were receiving olanzapine LAI in real-world clinical practice. Secondary aims were to further characterise the clinical presentation of PDSS events, to identify potential risk factors associated with PDSS events and to characterise hospitalisations at baseline and post-baseline. METHOD: A prospective observational study of adult patients with schizophrenia receiving olanzapine LAI from 24 countries. Data were collected on patient characteristics, olanzapine LAI treatment and any adverse events (AEs). All AEs were reviewed and adjudicated for PDSS using predetermined criteria. RESULTS: There were 46 confirmed PDSS events (0.044% of the 103 505 injections) in 45 patients (1.17% of the 3858 patients). Based on 45 confirmed events with time-to-onset information, 91.1% (n=41) occurred within 1 h of injection. Time-to-recovery from the event was within 72 h for 95.6% of patients (range 6 h to 11 days). Risk factors for PDSS (per-injection) included high dose (odds ratio (OR)high/low=3.95; P=0.006) and male gender (ORfemale/male=0.42; P=0.017). CONCLUSIONS: Results of this study confirm previously reported PDSS rates, time to onset and recovery, and the severity of PDSS events, and suggest that higher doses and male gender are potential risk factors associated with PDSS. DECLARATION OF INTEREST: All authors are full-time employees and hold stock/stock options in Eli Lilly, which funded this study. This post-authorisation safety study (PASS) was proposed by Eli Lilly when submitting the original marketing authorisation application for olanzapine LAI in 2007. The protocol and final study report for this European Union regulatory commitment are publicly accessible via the European Network of Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance (ENCePP) European Union PASS Register (www.encepp.eu/encepp/viewResource.htm?id=16847). The current manuscript describes the results within the final study report. COPYRIGHT AND USAGE: © The Royal College of Psychiatrists 2017. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Non-Commercial, No Derivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) license.

A phase 3 randomized placebo-controlled trial of tadalafil for Duchenne muscular dystrophy.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a randomized trial to test the primary hypothesis that once-daily tadalafil, administered orally for 48 weeks, lessens the decline in ambulatory ability in boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). METHODS: Three hundred thirty-one participants with DMD 7 to 14 years of age taking glucocorticoids were randomized to tadalafil 0.3 mg·kg-1·d-1, tadalafil 0.6 mg·kg-1·d-1, or placebo. The primary efficacy measure was 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) after 48 weeks. Secondary efficacy measures included North Star Ambulatory Assessment and timed function tests. Performance of Upper Limb (PUL) was a prespecified exploratory outcome. RESULTS: Tadalafil had no effect on the primary outcome: 48-week declines in 6MWD were 51.0 ± 9.3 m with placebo, 64.7 ± 9.8 m with low-dose tadalafil (p = 0.307 vs placebo), and 59.1 ± 9.4 m with high-dose tadalafil (p = 0.538 vs placebo). Tadalafil also had no effect on secondary outcomes. In boys >10 years of age, total PUL score and shoulder subscore declined less with low-dose tadalafil than placebo. Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of tadalafil and the DMD disease state. CONCLUSIONS: Tadalafil did not lessen the decline in ambulatory ability in boys with DMD. Further studies should be considered to confirm the hypothesis-generating upper limb data and to determine whether ambulatory decline can be slowed by initiation of tadalafil before 7 years of age. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01865084. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class I evidence that tadalafil does not slow ambulatory decline in 7- to 14-year-old boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy.

Clinical outcomes with olanzapine long-acting injection: impact of the 3-hour observation period on patient satisfaction and well-being.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the present analysis is to determine the impact of the 3-hour observation period for olanzapine long-acting injection (LAI) on patient satisfaction and well-being by comparing data collected before and after its implementation. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of patients treated with olanzapine LAI in 1) a 6-month fixed-dose randomized controlled trial and/or 2) a 6-year open-label safety study. This analysis was limited to patients with schizophrenia who were treated with olanzapine LAI consistent with the approved indication and dosing recommendations of the European Union Summary of Product Characteristics (N=966). Of the 966 patients, the analysis further focused only on those patients who received both 1) at least one injection before the implementation of the 3-hour observation period and 2) at least one injection after implementation of the 3-hour observation period (N=487). Patient satisfaction was assessed with the three-item Patient Satisfaction with Medication Questionnaire-Modified. Responses were averaged across all postbaseline visits occurring before (ie, without) the implementation of the 3-hour observation period and across all postbaseline visits occurring after (ie, with) the implementation of the 3-hour observation period. In addition, the rate of postinjection delirium/sedation syndrome events was calculated. RESULTS: There was no meaningful change after implementation of the 3-hour observation period in satisfaction (before: mean [SD] =4.0 [1.02] and after: mean [SD] =4.1 [0.82]), preference for olanzapine LAI over oral medication (before: mean [SD] =4.0 [0.90] and after: mean [SD] =4.1 [0.77]), or ratings of satisfaction regarding side effects (before: mean [SD] =1.9 [0.79] and after: mean [SD] =1.8 [0.60]). For the total population (N=966), postinjection delirium/sedation syndrome occurred in 26 (0.07%) of 38,010 injections. CONCLUSION: For patients with schizophrenia receiving treatment with olanzapine LAI, the 3-hour observation period had no impact on their satisfaction with the medication or on their subjective well-being.

A 52-Week Study of Olanzapine with a Randomized Behavioral Weight Counseling Intervention in Adolescents with Schizophrenia or Bipolar I Disorder.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the 52-week safety/tolerability of oral olanzapine for adolescents with schizophrenia or bipolar mania and compare effectiveness of a standard versus intense behavioral weight intervention in mitigating risk of weight gain. METHODS: Patients 13-17 years old with schizophrenia (Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale for Children [BPRS-C] total score >30; item score ≥3 for hallucinations, delusions, or peculiar fantasies) or bipolar I disorder (manic or mixed episode; Young Mania Rating Scale [YMRS] total score ≥15) received open-label olanzapine (2.5-20 mg/day) and were randomized to standard (n = 102; a single weight counseling session) or intense (n = 101; weight counseling at each study visit) weight intervention. The primary outcome measure was mean change in body mass index (BMI) from baseline to 52 weeks using mixed-model repeated measures. Symptomatology was also assessed. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences between groups were observed in mean baseline-to-52-week change in BMI (standard: +3.6 kg/m2; intense: +2.8 kg/m2; p = 0.150) or weight (standard: +12.1 kg; intense: +9.6 kg; p = 0.148). Percentage of patients at endpoint who had gained ≥15% of their baseline weight was 40% for the standard group and 31% for the intense group (p = 0.187). Safety/tolerability results were generally consistent with those of previous olanzapine studies in adolescents, with the most notable exception being the finding of a mean decrease in prolactin. On symptomatology measures, patients with schizophrenia had a mean baseline-to-52-week change in BPRS-C of -32.5 (standard deviation [SD] = 10.8), and patients with bipolar disorder had a mean change in YMRS of -16.7 (SD = 8.9), with clinically and statistically significant improvement starting at 3-4 days for each. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term weight gain was high in both groups, with no statistically significant differences between the standard or intense behavioral weight interventions in BMI or weight. Safety, tolerability, and effectiveness findings were generally consistent with the known profile of olanzapine in adolescents.

Olanzapine/Fluoxetine combination in children and adolescents with bipolar I depression: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of olanzapine/fluoxetine combination (OFC) for the acute treatment of bipolar depression in children and adolescents. METHOD: Patients 10 to 17 years of age with bipolar I disorder (BP-I), depressed episode, baseline Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) total score ≥40, Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score ≤15, and YMRS-item 1 ≤2 were randomized to OFC (6/25-12/50 mg/day olanzapine/fluoxetine; n = 170) or placebo (n = 85) for up to 8 weeks of double-blind treatment. The primary efficacy measure was mean change in CDRS-R using mixed-model repeated-measures methodology. RESULTS: Baseline-to-week-8 least-squares mean change in CDRS-R total score was greater for OFC-treated patients than for placebo-treated patients (-28.4 versus -23.4, p = .003; effect size = .46), with between-group differences statistically significant at week 1 (p = .02) and all subsequent visits (all p < .01). Rates of and times to response and remission were statistically significantly greater for OFC- than for placebo-treated patients. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events in the OFC group were weight gain, increased appetite, and somnolence. Mean weight gain at patient's endpoint was significantly greater for OFC- than for placebo-treated patients (4.4 kg versus 0.5 kg, p < .001). Treatment-emergent hyperlipidemia was very common among OFC-treated patients. Abnormal increases in hepatic analytes, prolactin, and corrected QT interval (QTc) were also common or very common but generally not clinically significant. CONCLUSION: In this study, OFC was superior to placebo, and has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the acute treatment of bipolar I depression in patients 10 to 17 years of age. Benefits should be weighed against the risk of adverse events, particularly weight gain and hyperlipidemia. Clinical trial registration information-A Study for Assessing Treatment of Patients Ages 10-17 with Bipolar Depression; http://clinicaltrials.gov; NCT00844857.

Hemorrhage control by law enforcement personnel: a survey of knowledge translation from the military combat experience.

BACKGROUND: Military data demonstrate that exsanguinating hemorrhage is the leading cause of potentially preventable combat death. The purpose of this study was to evaluate attitudes and approaches of civilian law enforcement personnel in the management of acute hemorrhagic trauma. METHODS: Anonymous survey administered via an online distribution mechanism. RESULTS: 1,317 U.S. law enforcement personnel began the survey. 370 respondents (30.4%) reported their agencies issued tourniquets, whereas 48.8% indicated their agencies had provided specific training in tourniquet application. Pressure dressings were provided to 43.6% of respondents while hemostatic agents were available to 29.8%. Tourniquets were considered the intervention most likely to save a life, but were also deemed most likely to possibly cause harm or injury if used inappropriately. 43 respondents (0.036%) stated they were aware of circumstances within the past year in which an officer in their agency sustained injuries where a tourniquet could have been used, but was not. CONCLUSIONS: Hemorrhage control supplies are being issued to less than half of the responding officers. When used, these interventions were generally thought to be effective. Further study is needed to delineate specific medical interventions, and therefore training and equipment, needed by law enforcement personnel.

Long-term safety and efficacy of olanzapine long-acting injection in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder: a 6-year, multinational, single-arm, open-label study.

The objective of this study was to assess the long-term safety and efficacy of olanzapine long-acting injection (LAI). A 6-year, single-arm, open-label extension study of olanzapine LAI was conducted at 127 sites in 25 countries. Patients were 18-76 years of age, were diagnosed with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder (N=931), and had been previously enrolled in one of three clinical trials of olanzapine LAI. Patients received flexibly dosed (45-405 mg) olanzapine LAI every 2-4 weeks. The mean duration of exposure was ∼3 years. A total of 393 (42.2%) patients completed the study. The mean weight change was +2.1 kg (P<0.001), with 40.6% of patients experiencing 7% or higher weight gain. Treatment-emergent categorical changes occurred in fasting glucose, total cholesterol, and triglyceride levels. Pharmacokinetic analyses revealed no systemic accumulation of olanzapine after long-term treatment. There were 36 occurrences of post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome, all resolving within 72 h. The mean Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total and subscale scores did not change significantly over the course of the study, indicating clinical stability. Olanzapine LAI appeared effective as a long-term maintenance treatment, with a safety profile generally consistent with the known profile of oral olanzapine, except for injection-related events (including post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome).

Within-drug benefit-risk evaluation of olanzapine long-acting injection at one and two years of treatment.

We sought to evaluate the within-drug benefit-risk of olanzapine long-acting injection (LAI) using both quantitative and qualitative methods. Subjects included 1192 adult patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who participated in clinical trials with the opportunity for at least two years of continuous treatment with olanzapine LAI (45-405 mg every two to four weeks). Using the Benefit Risk Action Team (BRAT) framework, we evaluated frequency versus duration of benefits and risks commonly observed with atypical antipsychotics. We then used the Transparent Uniform Risk/Benefit Overview (TURBO) method, which weighs the drug's two most medically serious and/or frequent adverse events versus its primary benefit (effectiveness) and an ancillary benefit. The most frequent events among all patients were remaining free of relapse (91.4% for an average of 306 days at one year, 88.4% for 546 days at two years) and symptomatic remission (81.7% for an average of 239 days at one year, 84.1% for 438 days at two years). One- and two-year incidence of ≥7% weight gain was 33.3% and 41.7%. Incidences for sexual dysfunction, hyperprolactinemia, and post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome (PDSS) were <2%. TURBO ratings unanimously selected PDSS and weight gain as key risks and resulted in an average score in the acceptable benefit-risk balance range.

Efficacy and safety of olanzapine/fluoxetine combination vs fluoxetine monotherapy following successful combination therapy of treatment-resistant major depressive disorder.

This study assessed prevention of relapse in patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) taking olanzapine/fluoxetine combination (OFC). Patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who failed to satisfactorily respond to ≥ 2 different antidepressants for ≥ 6 weeks within the current MDD episode were acutely treated for 6-8 weeks, followed by stabilization (12 weeks) on OFC. Those who remained stable were randomized to OFC or fluoxetine for up to 27 weeks. Time-to-relapse was the primary efficacy outcome defined as 50% increase in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale score with Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Depression score of ≥ 4; hospitalization for depression or suicidality; or discontinuation for lack of efficacy or worsening of depression or suicidality. A total of 444 patients were randomized 1:1 to OFC (N=221) or fluoxetine (N=223). Time-to-relapse was significantly longer in OFC-treated patients compared with fluoxetine-treated patients (p<0.001). Treatment-emergent weight gain and some mean and categorical fasting metabolic changes were significantly greater in OFC-treated patients. Clinically significant weight gain (≥ 7%) was observed in 55.7% of patients who remained on OFC throughout the study, including the relapse-prevention phase (up to 47 weeks). There were no significant differences between patients treated with OFC and fluoxetine in extrapyramidal symptoms or serious adverse events. We believe this is the first controlled relapse-prevention study in subjects with TRD that supports continued use of a second-generation antipsychotic beyond stabilization. A thorough assessment of benefits and risks (in particular metabolic changes) associated with continuing treatment with OFC or fluoxetine must be done based on individual patient needs.