Adaptive behavior in autism: Minimal clinically important differences on the Vineland-II.

Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is associated with persistent impairments in adaptive abilities across multiple domains. These social, personal, and communicative impairments become increasingly pronounced with development, and are present regardless of IQ. The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, Second Edition (Vineland-II) is the most commonly used instrument for quantifying these impairments, but minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) on Vineland-II scores have not been rigorously established in ASD. We pooled data from several consortia/registries (EU-AIMS LEAP study, ABIDE-I, ABIDE-II, INFOR, Simons Simplex Collection and Autism Treatment Network [ATN]) and clinical investigations and trials (Stanford, Yale, Roche) resulting in a data set of over 9,000 individuals with ASD. Two approaches were used to estimate MCIDs: distribution-based methods and anchor-based methods. Distribution-based MCID [d-MCID] estimates included the standard error of the measurement, as well as one-fifth and one-half of the covariate-adjusted standard deviation (both cross-sectionally and longitudinally). Anchor-based MCID [a-MCID] estimates include the slope of linear regression of clinician ratings of severity on the Vineland-II score, the slope of linear regression of clinician ratings of longitudinal improvement category on Vineland-II change, the Vineland-II change score maximally differentiating clinical impressions of minimal versus no improvement, and equipercentile equating. Across strata, the Vineland-II Adaptive Behavior Composite standardized score MCID estimates range from 2.01 to 3.2 for distribution-based methods, and from 2.42 to 3.75 for sample-size-weighted anchor-based methods. Lower Vineland-II standardized score MCID estimates were observed for younger and more cognitively impaired populations. These MCID estimates enable users of Vineland-II to assess both the statistical and clinical significance of any observed change. Autism Res 2018, 11: 270-283. © 2017 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. LAY SUMMARY: The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (2nd edition; Vineland-II) is the most widely used scale for assessing day-to-day "adaptive" skills. Yet, it is unknown how much Vineland-II scores must change for those changes to be regarded as clinically significant. We pooled data from over 9,000 individuals with ASD to show that changes of 2-3.75 points on the Vineland-II Composite score represent the "minimal clinically-important difference." These estimates will help evaluate the benefits of potential new treatments for ASD.

Famotidine relieves symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease and heals erosions and ulcerations. Results of a multicenter, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study. USA Merck Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Study Group.

We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial comparing the efficacy of famotidine 40 mg administered at bedtime (HS), 20 mg given twice daily (BID), and placebo to relieve heartburn and to heal endoscopically documented esophageal erosions or ulcerations. A total of 338 patients were randomized: 135 to receive famotidine 40 mg HS, 137 to receive famotidine 20 mg BID, and 66 to receive placebo. In the group given famotidine 20 mg BID, there was a significantly greater proportion of patients with complete relief of daytime heartburn, and both famotidine groups demonstrated statistically significant advantages over placebo in global scores or by successful outcome. Antacid consumption was significantly reduced in the group given famotidine 20 mg BID as compared with placebo. Both famotidine regimens resulted in a significantly greater proportion of patients with complete endoscopic healing than placebo, with the BID dosing being numerically superior to the 40-mg HS dose.

The efficacy and safety of budesonide inhalation suspension: a nebulizable corticosteroid for persistent asthma in infants and young children.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of four dosing regimens of budesonide inhalation suspension in children ages 6 months to 8 years with moderate persistent asthma. METHODS: This 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study involved 481 children at 38 centers throughout the United States. Active treatment groups were budesonide inhalation suspension .25 mg once daily (QD), .25-mg two times daily (BID), .5-mg BID, or 1-mg QD. Efficacy was assessed by recording nighttime and daytime asthma symptoms, use of rescue medication, and discontinuation from the study because of worsening asthma and/or a requirement for systemic steroids. Objective measures of pulmonary function were assessed in children who were capable of consistently performing pulmonary function tests; peak expiratory flow (PEF) measurements were recorded twice daily on diary cards, and spirometry was recorded at clinic visits. RESULTS: Baseline patient demographics, nighttime and daytime symptom scores, and pulmonary function data were similar across placebo and budesonide treatment groups. The majority of patients were male (64%) with a mean age of 55.0 +/- 26.3 months. The mean duration of asthma was 34.2 +/- 22.9 months, and mean baseline forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) was 79.8% of predicted, with 29.1% reversibility. Significant improvements in nighttime and daytime asthma symptoms scores were observed in budesonide treatment groups, compared with placebo. The mean change from baseline to week 0-12 for nighttime and daytime asthma symptom scores was significantly greater for the .25-mg BID, .5-mg BID, and 1-mg QD budesonide treatment groups, compared with placebo; significant clinical improvement was observed by the second week of treatment. The lowest budesonide dose used (.25 mg QD) resulted in numerical improvements in symptom scores that were not statistically significant when compared to placebo. Significant improvements in morning PEF were observed in all budesonide treatment groups, except for the .25-mg QD group, compared with placebo. All treatment groups showed numerical improvement in FEV1, but only the .5-mg BID dose was significantly different from placebo. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrate that budesonide inhalation suspension is effective and well tolerated for infants and young children with moderate persistent asthma. Budesonide inhalation suspension is an important therapeutic option for young children who are not able to use other available delivery devices.

Influence of the dosing interval on prolactin release after remoxipride.

1. The prolactin response following administration of the D2-dopamine receptor antagonist remoxipride was studied in eight healthy male volunteers. The purpose of the study was to investigate the duration of a refractory period of prolactin release following two doses of remoxipride. A further aim was to compare the prolactin response following remoxipride and thyrotropin release hormone (TRH) during the refractory period. The subjects received two 30 min intravenous (i.v.) infusions of remoxipride 50 mg with different time intervals between the two doses, in a randomized six period crossover design. The time intervals between the two remoxipride doses were 2, 8, 12, 24 and 48 h. On one occasion the remoxipride dose was followed by an i.v. injection of TRH after 2 h. 2. The plasma peak prolactin concentrations obtained after the first remoxipride dose correspond to a maximal release of prolactin according to earlier studies. A small second peak of prolactin was observed after 2 h. The release was gradually increased with longer time intervals between the consecutive doses. The refractory period for a second prolactin release similar to the first one after remoxipride was found to be 24 h for most of the subjects. 3. TRH resulted in a faster and higher increase in prolactin response of a shorter duration than after remoxipride administered 2 h after the first dose.

Once-daily budesonide inhalation suspension for the treatment of persistent asthma in infants and young children.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled glucocorticosteroids (GCS) are the most effective long-term controller medications for the treatment of persistent asthma. Currently, however, available delivery devices limit their use in young children. A nebulized formulation of budesonide has been developed to address the needs of infants and young children. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of once-daily budesonide inhalation suspension in children 6 months to 8 years old with mild persistent asthma not on inhaled GCS. METHODS: Three hundred fifty-nine children were randomized to receive once-daily budesonide inhalation suspension (0.25 mg, 0.50 mg, or 1.0 mg) or placebo via a Pari LC-Jet Plus nebulizer for 12 weeks. Efficacy assessments included nighttime/daytime asthma symptoms, pulmonary function (subset of patients), rescue medication use, and treatment discontinuations. Safety was based on adverse events and assessment of HPA-axis function. RESULTS: Demographics, baseline characteristics, asthma symptoms, and pulmonary function were similar across treatment groups. Mean nighttime/daytime asthma symptom scores were 1.19 +/- 0.63 and 1.34 +/- 0.53, respectively. Mean duration of asthma was 36.3 months and mean FEV1 was 81.3% of predicted with 27.7% reversibility. Following 12 weeks of treatment, all budesonide inhalation suspension doses produced significant improvements in nighttime/daytime symptoms (P < or = .049) and significant decreases in rescue medication use (P < or = .038) compared with placebo. Significant improvements (P < or = .044) in FEV1 were observed in the 0.5- and 1.0-mg budesonide inhalation suspension groups. There were no differences between doses of budesonide inhalation suspension. Adverse events and basal and ACTH-stimulated cortisol levels were similar among all groups. CONCLUSION: Once-daily administration of budesonide inhalation suspension was well tolerated and effective for the treatment of mild persistent asthma in infants and young children not adequately controlled with bronchodilators or non-GCS antiinflammatory treatments.

A multiple-dosing, placebo-controlled study of budesonide inhalation suspension given once or twice daily for treatment of persistent asthma in young children and infants.

RATIONALE: Topical antiinflammatory medications such as inhaled corticosteroids are recommended for therapy of asthma, but no formulation suitable for administration to infants and young children is available in the United States. METHODS: This was a 12-week, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study comparing the efficacy and safety of four dosing regimens of bude-sonide inhalation suspension (BIS) or placebo in 480 asthmatic infants and children (64% boys), ages 6 months to 8 years, with moderate persistent asthma. Approximately 30% of children were previously on inhaled corticosteroids that were discontinued before the study. Active treatments were comprised of BIS 0.25 mg once daily (QD), 0.25 mg twice a day (BID), 0.5 mg BID, or 1.0 mg QD. Efficacy was assessed by twice daily recording at home of asthma symptom scores and use of rescue medication, and discontinuation from the study because of worsening asthma and/or a requirement for systemic steroids. Peak flow measurements were recorded twice daily on diary and spirometry was recorded at clinic visits for those children able to perform these tests. Safety was assessed by reported adverse events and by cortisol testing (adrenocorticotropic hormone stimulation) in a subset of patients. RESULTS: Patients enrolled had an average duration of asthma of 34 months; the mean asthma symptom score was approximately 1.3 (scale of 0-3). All dosing regimens with BIS produced statistically significant improvement in various clinical efficacy measures for asthma control compared with placebo. The lowest dose used, 0.25 mg QD, was efficacious but with fewer efficacy parameters than seen with the other doses administered. Separation between active treatment and placebo in daytime and nighttime symptom scores were observed by week 2 of treatment for all BIS treatment regimens. A significant increase in peak flow measurement was observed in most active treatment groups compared with placebo in the subset of children able to do pulmonary function testing. All treatment groups showed numerical improvement in forced expiratory volume in 1 second but only the 0.5-mg BID dose was significantly different from placebo. Adverse events for the entire group and response to adrenocorticotropic hormone in a subgroup of children who underwent cortisol testing before and at the end of the treatment period were no different in budesonide-treated patients in comparison to placebo. CONCLUSION: Results of this study demonstrate that BIS is effective and safe for infants and young children with moderate persistent asthma in a multiple dose range, and that QD dosing is an important option to be considered by the prescribing physician.

Efficacy and safety of budesonide inhalation suspension (Pulmicort Respules) in young children with inhaled steroid-dependent, persistent asthma.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled glucocorticosteroids are indicated for the treatment of persistent asthma; however, many young children are unable to effectively use currently available inhalers. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 3 different twice daily doses of budesonide inhalation suspension (Pulmicort Respules) in inhaled steroid-dependent asthmatic children. METHODS: This was a 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study involving 178 children (age range, 4 to 8 years) at 17 centers in the United States. Budesonide inhalation suspension doses of 0.25 mg, 0.50 mg, or 1.0 mg twice daily were administered by means of a jet nebulizer and air compressor system. Efficacy was assessed by recording at home nighttime and daytime asthma symptom scores, use of rescue medication, pulmonary function tests, and treatment discontinuation because of worsening symptoms. Safety was assessed by reported adverse events and changes in baseline and adrenocorticotrophic hormone-stimulated plasma cortisol levels in a subset of patients. RESULTS: Baseline demographics, symptom scores, and pulmonary function data were similar across treatment groups. All doses of budesonide inhalation suspension were superior to placebo in improving nighttime and daytime asthma symptom scores (P

Longitudinal growth in infants and young children treated with budesonide inhalation suspension for persistent asthma.

BACKGROUND: Results of recent growth studies suggest that inhaled glucocorticosteroids may affect growth in children. OBJECTIVE: Three 52-week, open-label extension studies (studies A, B, and C) were conducted to compare the effects of budesonide inhalation suspension (BIS) with conventional asthma therapy (CAT) on long-term safety, including intermediate-term growth, in 3 different pediatric asthma populations. METHODS: Pediatric asthma patients (ages 6 months to 8 years) from 3 multicenter, randomized, 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies were eligible to enroll in the 52-week, open-label extension studies. The extension studies were multicenter, randomized, open-label, active-controlled, parallel-group studies performed at 26 centers in the United States. Subjects in each extension study were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive either BIS or CAT. BIS was initially administered at a dose of 0.5 mg once (studies A and C) or twice daily (study B), with attempts made at each clinical visit to gradually reduce the dose to the minimum effective dose that maintains asthma control, as judged by the investigator. CAT consisted of any available therapy for asthma, including inhaled glucocorticosteroids in studies B and C only. Height SD scores, growth velocity, and skeletal age (only in studies B and C) were examined. RESULTS: In total, 670 subjects were randomized; 223 subjects received CAT and 447 received BIS. Mean ages at entry were 63.0 months and 60.9 months in CAT and BIS groups, respectively. Median total daily doses of BIS ranged from 0.5 to 1. 0 mg and the mean duration of treatment exposure was 304 +/- 119 days and 342 +/- 83 days in CAT and BIS groups, respectively. Changes in height SD scores differed significantly between the BIS and CAT groups in study A (-0.19, P =.003), and there was a small, statistically significant decrease in growth velocity (-0.8 cm/y, P =.002) in the BIS-treated group compared with the CAT group. No significant differences were observed between BIS and CAT groups in the changes in height SD scores or in growth velocities in studies B (+0.10 and +0.7 cm/y, respectively) and C (+0.12 and +0.8 cm/y, respectively). No differences in skeletal age were observed between BIS and CAT groups in studies B and C. CONCLUSION: There was a small, statistically significant decrease in growth velocity in the BIS-treated group compared with the CAT group in the study (study A) where inhaled glucocorticosteroid use was prohibited before entry and in the CAT group during the study. In the studies (B and C) where inhaled glucocorticosteroids were allowed in the CAT group, no differences were observed in height SD scores or growth velocity. The clinical relevance of these effects, including impact on final adult height, remain to be determined in prospectively planned studies that assess growth in children.

Comparable efficacy of administration with face mask or mouthpiece of nebulized budesonide inhalation suspension for infants and young children with persistent asthma.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study including 481 children at 37 centers in the United States demonstrated the efficacy and safety of budesonide inhalation suspension in doses of 0.25 mg once daily, 0.25 mg twice daily, 0.5 mg twice daily, and 1.0 mg daily in infants and young children with persistent asthma. The retrospective analysis presented here compares the efficacy of treatment with the suspension administered through a face mask or mouthpiece. All patients receiving budesonide inhalation suspension via face mask or mouthpiece showed clinical improvements in nighttime and daytime asthma symptoms as compared with administration of a placebo. The improvements were of similar magnitude as those observed in an analysis of all patients treated. Improvements in nighttime asthma symptoms were statistically significant with budesonide at 0.25 mg daily (p = 0.040), 0.25 mg twice daily (p = 0.008), and 0.5 mg twice daily (p = 0.046) delivered by face mask. In patients using mouthpieces, nighttime asthma symptoms improved significantly in the 0.25-mg twice-daily (p = 0.005) and 1.0-mg daily (p = 0.035) groups. Patients receiving budesonide at 0.5 mg twice daily via a face mask improved significantly in daytime asthma symptoms (p = 0.009). The use of breakthrough medication was reduced in patients receiving budesonide via face masks or mouthpieces relative to placebo, and treatment was well tolerated in all study groups. This retrospective analysis suggests that nebulized budesonide inhalation suspension can be administered effectively by either face mask or mouthpiece to young children with persistent asthma.

Safety of budesonide inhalation suspension (Pulmicort Respules) after up to 52 weeks of treatment in infants and young children with persistent asthma.

Three open-label extension trials evaluated the safety of budesonide inhalation suspension (BIS; Pulmicort Respules) in 670 children (8 months-9 years of age) with mild-to-severe persistent asthma. Patients were randomized to receive either BIS or conventional asthma therapy (CAT) for 52 weeks. The percentage of patients who discontinued because of clinical adverse events was low and similar among the CAT (0.4%) and BIS (0.7%) groups. After adjusting for length of time in the studies, there were no clinically relevant differences between the BIS and CAT groups in the type, incidence, or intensity of adverse events; vital signs or physical examination outcomes; or changes in clinical laboratory evaluations or oral fungal cultures.

Budesonide enema for the treatment of active, distal ulcerative colitis and proctitis: a dose-ranging study. U.S. Budesonide enema study group.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Budesonide is a highly potent topical glucocorticosteroid that is characterized by low systemic availability as a result of high first-pass hepatic metabolism. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of three doses of an enema preparation of budesonide in patients with active distal ulcerative colitis/proctitis. METHODS: In a double-blind multicenter trial, 233 patients were randomized to receive either a placebo enema or budesonide enema at a dose of 0.5 mg/100 mL, 2.0 mg/100 mL, or 8.0 mg/100 mL. The primary efficacy variables were an improvement of sigmoidoscopic inflammation grade, total histopathology score, and remission rates. Effects on cortisol concentrations were also assessed. RESULTS: After 6 weeks of treatment, there was significant improvement in sigmoidoscopy and histopathology scores in the budesonide 2.0-mg and 8.0-mg dose groups compared with placebo. Remission was achieved in 19% of patients in the 2.0-mg budesonide group (P

Monitoring of clinical trials and interim analyses from a drug sponsor's point of view.

This paper illustrates aspects of data monitoring of clinical trials in the pharmaceutical industry. Formal interim analyses are performed at least in part to address the question of whether the trial should proceed or whether there should be an early termination of the trial. For formal interim analyses, frequently independent data and safety monitoring committees are utilized for monitoring clinical trials, and adjustments to nominal significance levels for test statistics are required. Various statistical methods developed during the last fifteen years are utilized. Administrative interim analyses are those analyses that are performed without any intention to stop the trial as a consequence of those analyses. For administrative interim analyses, adjustments to significance levels may not be required, but results must still be carefully interpreted. Regardless of the interim analyses performed, it is critical that the plans for interim analyses be identified in the study protocol, and the dissemination of interim results be carefully restricted. The following clinical trials sponsored by Merck Sharp and Dohme Research Laboratories (MSDRL) will illustrate these points: CONSENSUS; CONSENSUS II; 4S; Haemophilus influenza type b efficacy trial; famotidine in upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage, and a phase II analgesic study. It is anticipated that data monitoring and interim analysis activities will increase for future clinical trials due to the availability of appropriate statistical methods and improved data management systems.