Trial of Galcanezumab in Prevention of Episodic Cluster Headache.

BACKGROUND: Episodic cluster headache is a disabling neurologic disorder that is characterized by daily headache attacks that occur over periods of weeks or months. Galcanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody to calcitonin gene-related peptide, may be a preventive treatment for cluster headache. METHODS: We enrolled patients who had at least one attack every other day, at least four total attacks, and no more than eight attacks per day during a baseline assessment, as well as a history of cluster headache periods lasting at least 6 weeks, and randomly assigned them to receive galcanezumab (at a dose of 300 mg) or placebo, administered subcutaneously at baseline and at 1 month. The primary end point was the mean change from baseline in the weekly frequency of cluster headache attacks across weeks 1 through 3 after receipt of the first dose. The key secondary end point was the percentage of patients who had a reduction from baseline of at least 50% in the weekly frequency of cluster headache attacks at week 3. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: Recruitment was halted before the trial reached the planned sample size of 162 because too few volunteers met the eligibility criteria. Of 106 enrolled patients, 49 were randomly assigned to receive galcanezumab and 57 to receive placebo. The mean (±SD) number of cluster headache attacks per week in the baseline period was 17.8±10.1 in the galcanezumab group and 17.3±10.1 in the placebo group. The mean reduction in the weekly frequency of cluster headache attacks across weeks 1 through 3 was 8.7 attacks in the galcanezumab group, as compared with 5.2 in the placebo group (difference, 3.5 attacks per week; 95% confidence interval, 0.2 to 6.7; P = 0.04). The percentage of patients who had a reduction of at least 50% in headache frequency at week 3 was 71% in the galcanezumab group and 53% in the placebo group. There were no substantial between-group differences in the incidence of adverse events, except that 8% of the patients in the galcanezumab group had injection-site pain. CONCLUSIONS: Galcanezumab administered subcutaneously at a dose of 300 mg once monthly reduced the weekly frequency of attacks of episodic cluster headache across weeks 1 through 3 after the initial injection, as compared with placebo. (Funded by Eli Lilly; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02397473.).

Lasmiditan efficacy in the acute treatment of migraine was independent of prior response to triptans: Findings from the CENTURION study.

BACKGROUND: A significant proportion of triptan users exhibit an insufficient response or inadequate tolerability to a triptan, and some may develop a contraindication. Lasmiditan, a selective 5-HT1F receptor agonist, may be an option for these individuals. We assessed lasmiditan efficacy in a subgroup of patients in CENTURION (Phase 3 migraine consistency study) who exhibited an insufficient response to triptans, including a subgroup with insufficient response due to efficacy only. METHODS: Patients were randomized to lasmiditan 200 mg for four attacks, lasmiditan 100 mg for four attacks, or placebo for three and lasmiditan 50 mg for one attack. Triptan insufficient responders were pre-defined as patients with insufficient efficacy or tolerability, or who developed a contraindication. RESULTS: In triptan insufficient responders, lasmiditan was superior to placebo (p < 0.05) for pain freedom beginning at 1 h (both doses); pain relief beginning at 0.5 (200 mg) or 1 h (100 mg); migraine-related disability freedom, much/very much better on the Patient Global Impression of Change, and most bothersome symptom freedom at 2 h; sustained pain freedom; and need for rescue medication. Lasmiditan showed benefit for consistency of effect across attacks for 2-h pain freedom and pain relief. Findings were similar in triptan responders and triptan naïve patients and when the triptan insufficient response definition was based on efficacy only. CONCLUSIONS: Lasmiditan was efficacious across multiple clinically relevant endpoints in the acute treatment of migraine independent of prior response to triptans.Trial Registration: CENTURION (NCT03670810); SAMURAI (NCT02439320); SPARTAN (NCT02605174).

Randomized, controlled trial of lasmiditan over four migraine attacks: Findings from the CENTURION study.

BACKGROUND: We present findings from the multicenter, double-blind Phase 3 study, CENTURION. This study was designed to assess the efficacy of and consistency of response to lasmiditan in the acute treatment of migraine across four attacks. METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to one of three treatment groups - lasmiditan 200 mg; lasmiditan 100 mg; or a control group that received placebo for three attacks and lasmiditan 50 mg for either the third or fourth attack. The primary endpoints were pain freedom at 2 h (first attack) and pain freedom at 2 h in ≥2/3 attacks. Secondary endpoints included pain relief, sustained pain freedom and disability freedom. Statistical testing used a logistic regression model and graphical methodology to control for multiplicity. RESULTS: Overall, 1471 patients treated ≥1 migraine attack with the study drug. Both primary endpoints were met for lasmiditan 100 mg and 200 mg (p < 0.001). All gated secondary endpoints were met. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was highest during the first attack. The most common TEAEs with lasmiditan were dizziness, paresthesia, fatigue, and nausea; these were generally mild or moderate in severity. CONCLUSIONS: These results confirm the early and sustained efficacy of lasmiditan 100 mg and 200 mg and demonstrate consistency of response across multiple attacks.Trial Registration Number: NCT03670810.

The Influence of Migraine on Driving: Current Understanding, Future Directions, and Potential Implications of Findings.

OBJECTIVE: To review the published findings relevant to migraine and driving performance, with an intent to encourage discussion on research which may broaden understanding in this area and help educate healthcare providers and their patients. BACKGROUND: Motor vehicle crashes result in more than 35,000 deaths and more than 2 million injuries annually in the United States. Migraine is one of the most prevalent diseases in the world, and many symptoms associated with migraine attacks have the potential to negatively influence driving ability. METHODS: We reviewed the published findings related to migraine and driving performance. Study findings relevant to symptoms of migraine and their potential effect on driving were also reviewed. This required a more expansive exploration of the literature beyond migraine, for example, review of the literature relating to the effect of pain, sleepiness, visual disturbances, or vertigo on driving. Finally, the potential effects of treatment for migraine on driving were reviewed. RESULTS: Literature on the effect of migraine on driving performance is sparse and, in general published studies on the topic have a number of limitations. Based on review of the literature pertaining to other disorders, it seems feasible that some symptoms occurring as part of the migraine attack could impact driving performance, although formal study in this area is lacking. Many of the approved treatments for migraine have the potential to impact driving, yet this has not been specifically studied, and the extent to which these risks are communicated to patients is not clear. CONCLUSION: The impact of migraine on driving performance has been largely neglected, with few studies specifically designed to address the topic, and relevant studies were generally small with limited control of confounders. This area requires more focus, given a potential for impact on road safety.

Safety findings from Phase 3 lasmiditan studies for acute treatment of migraine: Results from SAMURAI and SPARTAN.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the safety profile of lasmiditan, a selective 5-HT1F receptor agonist without vasoconstrictive activity being developed as an acute therapy for migraine. METHODS: SAMURAI and SPARTAN were Phase 3 double-blind studies of patients with migraine, randomized to oral lasmiditan 50 mg (SPARTAN only), 100 mg, 200 mg, or placebo to be taken within 4 hours of onset of migraine pain. Safety data from the studies were integrated. Treatment-emergent adverse events (occurring within 48 hours of first dose) were considered in the analyses. RESULTS: The safety population comprised 1262 patients assigned placebo, and 654, 1265, and 1258 assigned lasmiditan 50 mg, 100 mg, and 200 mg, respectively. There were no deaths; serious adverse events were reported for seven patients (placebo, n = 2 [0.2%]; lasmiditan 50 mg, n = 1 [0.2%]; lasmiditan 100 mg, n = 1 [0.2%]; lasmiditan 200 mg, n = 3 [0.2%]). Patients reporting ≥ 1 treatment-emergent adverse events were: Placebo, n = 174 (13.5%); lasmiditan 50 mg, n = 166 (25.4%); lasmiditan 100 mg, n = 458 (36.2%); and lasmiditan 200 mg, n = 510 (40.6%). Treatment-emergent adverse events were generally mild or moderate in severity. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events with lasmiditan were dizziness, paresthesia, somnolence, fatigue, nausea, muscular weakness and hypoesthesia. There were no ischemic events. CONCLUSIONS: As a centrally-penetrant drug, lasmiditan use was associated with neurologic treatment-emergent adverse events; most were mild or moderate in severity and self-limiting. TRIAL REGISTRATION AT CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: SAMURAI (NCT02439320) and SPARTAN (NCT02605174).

Effect of a rescue or recurrence dose of lasmiditan on efficacy and safety in the acute treatment of migraine: findings from the phase 3 trials (SAMURAI and SPARTAN).

BACKGROUND: We studied the efficacy and safety of a second dose of lasmiditan for acute treatment of migraine. METHODS: SAMURAI and SPARTAN were double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 3 studies in which individuals with migraine were randomized to oral lasmiditan 50 mg (SPARTAN only), 100 mg, 200 mg, or placebo. Study drug was to be taken within 4 h (h) of onset of a migraine attack (moderate or severe pain). A second dose of study drug was provided for rescue (patient not pain-free at 2 h and took a second dose 2-24 h post-first dose) or recurrence (patient pain-free at 2 h, but experienced recurrence of mild, moderate, or severe migraine pain and took a second dose 2-24 h after first dose). Randomization to second dose occurred at baseline; patients originally assigned lasmiditan were randomized to the same lasmiditan dose or placebo (2:1 ratio), and those originally assigned placebo received placebo. Data from SAMURAI and SPARTAN were pooled for efficacy and safety assessment of a second dose of lasmiditan. RESULTS: The proportion of patients taking a second dose was lower with lasmiditan versus placebo, and decreased with increasing lasmiditan dose; the majority who took a second dose did so for rescue. In patients taking lasmiditan as first dose, outcomes (pain free, most bothersome symptom [MBS] free) at 2 h after a second dose for rescue were similar whether the second dose was lasmiditan or placebo (p > 0.05 in all cases). In patients taking lasmiditan for first dose, outcomes at 2 h after a second dose for recurrence were as follows: lasmiditan pooled versus placebo - pain free, 50% vs 32% (p > 0.05); MBS free, 71% vs 41% (p = 0.02); pain relief, 77% vs 52% (p = 0.03). In patients whose first dose was lasmiditan, the incidence of treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) reported after the second dose was similar whether second dose was lasmiditan or placebo. CONCLUSIONS: A second dose of lasmiditan showed some evidence of efficacy when taken for headache recurrence. There was no clear benefit of a second dose of lasmiditan for rescue treatment. The incidences of TEAEs were similar whether the second dose was lasmiditan or placebo. TRIAL REGISTRATION: SAMURAI ( NCT02439320 ) [April 2015]. SPARTAN ( NCT02605174 ) [May 2016].

Characterization of Dizziness After Lasmiditan Usage: Findings From the SAMURAI and SPARTAN Acute Migraine Treatment Randomized Trials.

TRIAL DESIGN: SAMURAI and SPARTAN were double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 3 studies conducted in the United States, as well as the United Kingdom and Germany (SPARTAN only). Individuals with migraine were randomized to receive oral lasmiditan 50 mg (SPARTAN only), 100 mg, 200 mg, or placebo within 4 hours of onset of a migraine attack. The aim of this analysis was to characterize dizziness reported with lasmiditan treatment. METHODS: Data from SAMURAI and SPARTAN were pooled for the current post hoc analyses. Onset time and duration of dizziness were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Subgroup analyses based on presence/absence of dizziness were performed for the endpoints of interference with daily activity, patient global impression of change (PGIC), pain at 2 hours, and most bothersome symptom (MBS) at 2 hours based on adverse events occurring within 2 hours of taking study drug. RESULTS: Dizziness incidence was as follows: Placebo (N = 1262), 2.9% (0.1% severe); lasmiditan 50 mg (N = 654), 8.6% (0.3% severe); lasmiditan 100 mg (N = 1265), 14.9% (0.7% severe); and lasmiditan 200 mg (N = 1258), 16.8% (1.4% severe). Among participants who received lasmiditan as their first dose, risk factors for dizziness were higher lasmiditan dosage, being non-Hispanic/Latino, mild or moderate severity of migraine attack, and lower body mass index. The median time to onset of dizziness was generally 30-40 minutes, and the median duration was 1.5-2 hours. The presence of dizziness did not appear to have a negative influence on lasmiditan's effect on daily activity, PGIC, freedom from pain, or MBS. Overall, 21 participants experienced vertigo: Lasmiditan 50 mg, n = 2 (0.3%); 100 mg, n = 11 (0.9%); 200 mg, n = 7 (0.6%); and placebo, n = 1 (<0.1%). CONCLUSION: The incidence of dizziness with lasmiditan increased with dose. Dizziness was generally mild or moderate in severity and of quick onset and short duration. The presence of dizziness did not influence drug efficacy.

Effect of Testosterone Solution 2% on Testosterone Concentration, Sex Drive and Energy in Hypogonadal Men: Results of a Placebo Controlled Study.

PURPOSE: We determined the effect of testosterone solution 2% on total testosterone level and the 2 symptoms of hypogonadism, sex drive and energy level. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo controlled, 16-week study to compare the effect of testosterone and placebo on the proportion of men with a testosterone level within the normal range (300 to 1,050 ng/dl) upon treatment completion. We also assessed the impact of testosterone on sex drive and energy level measured using SAID (Sexual Arousal, Interest and Drive scale) and HED (Hypogonadism Energy Diary), respectively. A total of 715 males 18 years old or older with total testosterone less than 300 ng/dl and at least 1 symptom of testosterone deficiency (decreased energy and/or decreased sexual drive) were randomized to 60 mg topical testosterone solution 2% or placebo once daily. RESULTS: Of study completers 73% in the testosterone vs 15% in the placebo group had a testosterone level within the normal range at study end point (p <0.001). Participants assigned to testosterone showed greater baseline to end point improvement in SAID scores (low sex drive subset p <0.001 vs placebo) and HED scores (low energy subset p = 0.02 vs placebo, not significant at prespecified p <0.01). No major adverse cardiovascular or venous thrombotic events were reported in the testosterone group. The incidence of increased hematocrit was higher with testosterone vs placebo (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Once daily testosterone solution 2% for 12 weeks was efficacious in restoring normal testosterone levels and improving sexual drive in hypogonadal men. Improvement was also seen in energy levels on HED though not at the prespecified p <0.01. No new safety signals were identified.

Phase 3 solanezumab trials: Secondary outcomes in mild Alzheimer's disease patients.

INTRODUCTION: EXPEDITION and EXPEDITION2 were identically designed placebo-controlled phase 3 studies assessing effects of solanezumab, an antiamyloid monoclonal antibody binding soluble amyloid-ß peptide, on cognitive and functional decline over 80 weeks in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD). Primary findings for both studies have been published. METHODS: Secondary analyses of efficacy, biomarker, and safety endpoints in the pooled (EXPEDTION + EXPEDITION2) mild AD population were performed. RESULTS: In the mild AD population, less cognitive and functional decline was observed with solanezumab (n = 659) versus placebo (n = 663), measured by Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale Cognitive subscale, Mini-Mental State Examination, and Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living functional scale Instrumental ADLs. Baseline-to-endpoint changes did not differ between treatment groups for Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living functional scale, basic items of the ADCS-ADL, and Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes. Plasma/cerebrospinal fluid biomarker findings indicated target engagement by solanezumab. Solanezumab demonstrated acceptable safety. Efficacy findings for the moderate AD population are also provided. DISCUSSION: These findings describe solanezumab effects on efficacy/safety measures in a mild AD population. Another phase 3 study, EXPEDITION3, will investigate solanezumab's effects in a mild AD population.

Duloxetine and pregnancy outcomes: safety surveillance findings.

BACKGROUND: Duloxetine hydrochloride is approved for the treatment or management of major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain, chronic musculoskeletal pain, and fibromyalgia in the United States. These conditions affect millions of women, including those of childbearing potential. In pregnancy, pharmacological treatment is justified only if the potential benefits outweigh potential risks to mother and fetus, neonate or infant. There are no adequate and well-controlled studies in pregnant women treated with duloxetine. Post-marketing surveillance is an important tool for the assessment of drug safety in pregnancy in a naturalistic setting. OBJECTIVE: Using safety surveillance and spontaneous adverse events reporting databases, to provide pregnancy outcomes statistics as they relate to duloxetine exposure. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: This was an analysis of pregnancy outcome data captured in Lilly Safety System (LSS) (a safety database for the collection, storage, and reporting of adverse events involving Lilly Products), through October 31 2011 and the FDA Adverse Events Reporting System (AERS) database through September 30 2011. Both databases provided spontaneous reporting data from the time of first duloxetine marketing authorization in 2004; in addition, the LSS Database includes serious adverse event and pregnancy data from clinical trials since the creation of the database in 1983. PATIENTS: Patients who had received duloxetine during pregnancy and reported pregnancy outcomes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Normal and abnormal pregnancy outcomes. Abnormal outcomes comprised spontaneous abortion, premature/post-term birth, congenital anomaly, perinatal/post-perinatal complication, still birth, and ectopic pregnancy. Descriptive statistics are provided for LSS data. A disproportionality analysis was performed using the Empirical Bayes Geometric Mean (EBGM) for the AERS data. The lower bound of the 90% confidence interval of EBGM (EB05) ≥1 was used as the threshold to determine disproportionality. RESULTS: In the LSS analysis, 400 pregnancy cases with a known pregnancy outcome were identified. Of the 233 prospectively reported cases, 170 (73%) were spontaneous reports; the remainder were reported from clinical trials (58 [25%]) or post-marketing studies (5 [2%]). In most of these cases (74%), patients received duloxetine for the treatment of depression. Pregnancy outcomes were normal in 143 cases, and abnormal in 90 cases. Abnormal pregnancy outcomes were mainly spontaneous abortions (n=41), post/perinatal conditions (n=25) or premature births (n=19). In patients with abnormal pregnancy outcomes, relevant concomitant medication use and relevant medical history were more frequently reported, compared to those with normal pregnancy outcomes (p<0.05). For the AERS database analysis, EB05 was less than one for all clusters of abnormal pregnancy outcomes; there was no disproportionality of reporting adverse pregnancy outcomes for patients treated with duloxetine versus all other drugs or selected antidepressants. CONCLUSION: While limitations of these data are recognized, the information available to date from these two data sources suggest that the frequency of abnormal outcomes reported in duloxetine pregnancy cases is generally consistent with the historic control rates in the general population.

Meaningful Clinical Changes in Alzheimer Disease Measured With the iADRS and Illustrated Using the Donanemab TRAILBLAZER-ALZ Study Findings.

Purpose of Review: To provide relevant background of the Integrated Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale (iADRS), with examples, to assist the reader with the interpretation of iADRS findings from the TRAILBLAZER-ALZ study. Recent Findings: The iADRS is an integrated measure of global Alzheimer disease (AD) severity for use in the clinical trial environment. It provides a single score that captures commonalities across cognitive and functional ability domains, reflecting disease-related impairment, while minimizing noise not related to disease progression that may exist within each domain. In AD, disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) are expected to slow the rate of clinical decline, changing the trajectory of disease progression. The overall percent slowing of disease progression with treatment is a more informative outcome of effect than absolute point differences between treatment and placebo groups at any given time point because the latter is influenced by treatment period and disease severity. The TRAILBLAZER-ALZ trial was a phase 2 study designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of donanemab in participants with early symptomatic AD; the primary outcome measure was the change from baseline to 76 weeks on the iADRS. In the TRAILBLAZER-ALZ study, donanemab slowed disease progression by 32% at 18 months (p = 0.04 vs placebo), demonstrating clinical efficacy. At the patient level, one can assess whether the DMT effect is clinically meaningful by estimating the threshold of change consistent with clinically meaningful worsening; based on the TRAILBLAZER-ALZ findings, treatment with donanemab would delay reaching this threshold by approximately 6 months. Summary: The iADRS is capable of accurately describing clinical changes associated with disease progression and detecting treatment effects and is an effective assessment tool for use in clinical trials of individuals with early symptomatic AD.

Breast cancer incidence in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis or low bone mass using arzoxifene.

The Generations trial, a multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial, compared arzoxifene 20 mg/day and placebo in 9,354 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis (N=5,252) or low bone mass (N=4,102). Primary outcomes were vertebral fracture in the osteoporotic population and invasive breast cancer in all study participants. Here, we report the detailed breast cancer findings from the trial. Breast cancers were detected by annual mammograms and clinical examination. After 48 months follow-up, breast cancer incidence was compared between treatment groups by estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) status and baseline risk factors. Baseline breast cancer risk factors, including age, estimated Gail risk, and bone mineral density, were well balanced between treatment groups. A total of 75 breast cancers occurred 53 in the placebo group and 22 in the arzoxifene group (HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.25-0.68, P<0.001). There were 62 invasive breast cancers, 39 identified as invasive ER-positive (placebo 30, arzoxifene 9; HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.14-0.63, P=0.001) and 30 identified as invasive PR-positive (placebo 23, arzoxifene 7; HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.13-0.71, P=0.003). Breast cancer risk reduction with arzoxifene was similar between Gail risk groups (P interaction=0.31) and between low bone mass and osteoporosis groups (P interaction=0.35). Although generally well tolerated, there was a significant increase in venous thromboembolism, vasomotor symptoms, muscle cramps, and some gynecological events with arzoxifene. These findings demonstrate that in this study arzoxifene reduced the risk of ER-positive breast cancer in this population of postmenopausal women with low bone mass or osteoporosis, an effect similar to that seen with other SERMs.

Demonstration of Clinical Meaningfulness of the Integrated Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale (iADRS): Association Between Change in iADRS Scores and Patient and Caregiver Health Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The integrated Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale (iADRS) is a validated cognitive/functional composite that effectively captures cognitive and functional decline over a broad spectrum of disease. The clinical meaningfulness of change on iADRS can be supported by establishing an association with changes on important health outcome measures. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between change on the iADRS and changes in health outcomes in individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) due to Alzheimer's disease (AD), or mild or moderate AD dementia using placebo data from four AD clinical trials and data from one AD observational study. METHODS: Analysis of covariate (ANCOVA) models were used to estimate the relationship between 18-month change on the iADRS and changes on health outcome measures (related to cost, quality of life, and caregiver burden). The regression coefficients for the iADRS were used to compute impact of natural disease progression and disease-modifying treatment on health outcomes. Additional ANCOVAs were conducted to understand whether cognition and/or function was the underlying explanation of any association between iADRS and health outcome change. RESULTS: Across datasets and disease stages, a worsening on the iADRS was significantly associated with increased societal costs, caregiver burden (time and distress) and worsening in measures of patient quality of life. CONCLUSION: Decline on the iADRS was associated with worsening in health outcome measures. These findings suggest that the iADRS can be used in clinical trials as a proxy measure of clinically meaningful outcomes of AD progression.

Effects of the selective estrogen receptor modulator raloxifene on coronary outcomes in the Raloxifene Use for The Heart trial: results of subgroup analyses by age and other factors.

BACKGROUND: The Raloxifene Use for The Heart (RUTH) trial showed that raloxifene, a selective estrogen receptor modulator, had no overall effect on the incidence of coronary events in women with established coronary heart disease or coronary heart disease risk factors. We provide detailed results of the effect of raloxifene on coronary outcomes over time and for 24 subgroups (17 predefined, 7 post hoc). METHODS AND RESULTS: Postmenopausal women (n=10 101; mean age, 67 years) were randomized to raloxifene 60 mg/d or placebo for a median of 5.6 years. Coronary outcomes were assessed by treatment group in women with coronary heart disease risk factors and those with established coronary heart disease. Raloxifene had no effect on the incidence of coronary events in any subgroup except in the case of a post hoc age subgroup analysis using age categories defined in the Women's Health Initiative randomized trials. The effect of raloxifene on the incidence of coronary events differed significantly by age (interaction P=0.0118). The incidence of coronary events in women <60 years of age was significantly lower in those assigned raloxifene (50 events) compared with placebo (84 events; hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.83; P=0.003; absolute risk reduction, 36 per 1000 women treated for 1 year). No difference was found between treatment groups in the incidence of coronary events in women > or =60 and <70 or > or =70 years of age. CONCLUSIONS: In postmenopausal women at increased risk of coronary events, the overall lack of benefit of raloxifene was similar across the prespecified subgroups.

Improvement in Function after Lasmiditan Treatment: Post Hoc Analysis of Data from Phase 3 Studies.

INTRODUCTION: Migraine is associated with substantial functional impairment and affects many aspects of daily life. METHODS: Using data from SAMURAI and SPARTAN (double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 studies) and GLADIATOR (an open-label, phase 3 study enrolling patients who had completed SAMURAI or SPARTAN), we assessed the effects of lasmiditan on migraine-related functional disability at multiple time points from 0.5 to 48 h post dose by asking patients to rate how much the migraine was interfering with normal activities. Pooled data from SAMURAI and SPARTAN (SAMURAI + SPARTAN) and data from GLADIATOR were analyzed using the intention-to-treat populations. RESULTS: For SPARTAN + SAMURAI, significantly more patients who received lasmiditan at any dose versus placebo reported freedom from migraine-related functional disability at every timepoint from 2 h post dose, and this difference persisted to 48 h (p < 0.05). Significant differences from placebo in freedom from migraine-related functional disability commenced at 1 h post dose for lasmiditan 200 mg, 1.5 h for lasmiditan 100 mg, and 2 h for lasmiditan 50 mg. Findings from GLADIATOR supported those from SAMURAI + SPARTAN. CONCLUSION: All doses of lasmiditan resulted in an improvement in migraine-related functional disability that persisted to 48 h. In SAMURAI + SPARTAN, a significant difference from placebo was observed as early as 1 h post dose. TRIAL REGISTRATION AT CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: SAMURAI (NCT02439320), SPARTAN (NCT02605174), and GLADIATOR (NCT02565186).

Effect of raloxifene on stroke and venous thromboembolism according to subgroups in postmenopausal women at increased risk of coronary heart disease.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Raloxifene, a selective estrogen receptor modulator, reduces risk of invasive breast cancer and osteoporosis, but the effect on risk for stroke and venous thromboembolism in different patient subgroups is not established. The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate the effect of raloxifene on the incidence of all strokes, stroke deaths, and venous thromboembolic events according to participant subgroups. METHODS: This was a secondary end point analysis of an international, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial of 10 101 postmenopausal women with or at increased risk of coronary heart disease followed a median of 5.6 years. Strokes, venous thromboembolic events, and deaths were adjudicated by expert centralized committees. Strokes were categorized as ischemic, hemorrhagic, or undetermined and venous thromboembolic events were subclassified. RESULTS: The incidences of all strokes did not differ between raloxifene (incidence rate per 100 woman-years=0.95) and placebo (incidence rate=0.86) treatment groups (P=0.30). In women assigned raloxifene versus placebo, there was a higher incidence of fatal strokes (incidence rates=0.22 and 0.15, respectively, P=0.0499) and venous thromboembolic events (incidence rates=0.39 and 0.27, respectively, P=0.02). No significant subgroup interactions were found except that there was a higher incidence of stroke associated with raloxifene use among current smokers. CONCLUSIONS: In postmenopausal women at increased risk for coronary events, the incidences of venous thromboembolism and fatal stroke but not all strokes were higher in those assigned raloxifene versus placebo. Raloxifene's effect did not differ across subgroups, except that the risk of stroke differed by smoking status. Treatment decisions about raloxifene should be based on a balance of projected absolute risks and benefits.

Carotid artery intima-media thickness after raloxifene treatment.

BACKGROUND: Raloxifene, a selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM), decreases total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in postmenopausal women and inhibits increases in intima-media thickness (IMT) in animal models. We tested whether up to 8 years exposure to raloxifene had an effect on subclinical atherosclerosis in the 4-year Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation (MORE) trial and the follow-up study, the 4-year Continuing Outcomes Relevant to Evista (CORE) trial. METHODS: A subsample of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, who had completed the MORE and CORE trials and were on average 68 years of age and 19 years postmenopausal at randomization into MORE, participated in this substudy. Within 6 months of cessation of study drug in CORE, right common carotid artery IMT (CIMT) and carotid artery stiffness and arterial compliance were measured at one of two sites (San Diego and San Francisco) using high-resolution B-mode ultrasound. CIMT and arterial stiffness measures were compared between women who had received raloxifene vs. placebo; the primary analysis included only women who were >or=80% drug compliant and had used

Effect of raloxifene on the incidence of invasive breast cancer in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis categorized by breast cancer risk.

PURPOSE: To assess the effect of raloxifene, indicated for osteoporosis treatment and prevention, on invasive breast cancer in subgroups of postmenopausal women defined by risk factors for breast cancer. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Data from the 4-year Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation (MORE) trial (N=7,705) and a follow-up study, the 4-year Continuing Outcomes Relevant to Evista (CORE) trial (N=4,011), were analyzed. Prespecified subgroups were defined by age (>or=65 versus<65 years), age at menopause (>or=49 versus<49 years), body mass index (>or=25 versus<25 kg/m2), family history of breast cancer (yes/no), serum estradiol level (5-10 versus<5, >10 versus<5 pmol/L), prior estrogen therapy (yes/no), and bone mass at MORE baseline, and 5-year predicted risk, assessed using the modified Gail model (>or=1.67 versus<1.67%), at CORE baseline. Time-to-first invasive breast cancer was analyzed using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: In the placebo group, older age, higher estradiol level, and a family history of breast cancer were associated with an increased breast cancer risk (P<0.05). Raloxifene therapy was associated with a reduced breast cancer risk in both women at lower and those at higher breast cancer risk. Hazard ratio point estimates were 0.11 to 0.67, corresponding to a 33% to 89% reduction in breast cancer risk with raloxifene versus placebo. The therapy by family history interaction was significant (P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Raloxifene therapy was associated with a reduced risk of invasive breast cancer in postmenopausal women irrespective of the presence/absence of risk factors; its effect was greater in women with a family history of breast cancer.

On the path to 2025: understanding the Alzheimer's disease continuum.

Basic research advances in recent years have furthered our understanding of the natural history of Alzheimer's disease (AD). It is now recognized that pathophysiological changes begin many years prior to clinical manifestations of disease and the spectrum of AD spans from clinically asymptomatic to severely impaired. Defining AD purely by its clinical presentation is thus artificial and efforts have been made to recognize the disease based on both clinical and biomarker findings. Advances with biomarkers have also prompted a shift in how the disease is considered as a clinico-pathophysiological entity, with an increasing appreciation that AD should not only be viewed with discrete and defined clinical stages, but as a multifaceted process moving along a seamless continuum. Acknowledging this concept is critical to understanding the development process for disease-modifying therapies, and for initiating effective diagnostic and disease management options. In this article, we discuss the concept of a disease continuum from pathophysiological, biomarker, and clinical perspectives, and highlight the importance of considering AD as a continuum rather than discrete stages. While the pathophysiology of AD has still not been elucidated completely, there is ample evidence to support researchers and clinicians embracing the view of a disease continuum in their study, diagnosis, and management of the disease.