Chlorthalidone vs. Hydrochlorothiazide for Hypertension-Cardiovascular Events.

BACKGROUND: Whether chlorthalidone is superior to hydrochlorothiazide for preventing major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with hypertension is unclear. METHODS: In a pragmatic trial, we randomly assigned adults 65 years of age or older who were patients in the Department of Veterans Affairs health system and had been receiving hydrochlorothiazide at a daily dose of 25 or 50 mg to continue therapy with hydrochlorothiazide or to switch to chlorthalidone at a daily dose of 12.5 or 25 mg. The primary outcome was a composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure resulting in hospitalization, urgent coronary revascularization for unstable angina, and non-cancer-related death. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 13,523 patients underwent randomization. The mean age was 72 years. At baseline, hydrochlorothiazide at a dose of 25 mg per day had been prescribed in 12,781 patients (94.5%). The mean baseline systolic blood pressure in each group was 139 mm Hg. At a median follow-up of 2.4 years, there was little difference in the occurrence of primary-outcome events between the chlorthalidone group (702 patients [10.4%]) and the hydrochlorothiazide group (675 patients [10.0%]) (hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.94 to 1.16; P = 0.45). There were no between-group differences in the occurrence of any of the components of the primary outcome. The incidence of hypokalemia was higher in the chlorthalidone group than in the hydrochlorothiazide group (6.0% vs. 4.4%, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this large pragmatic trial of thiazide diuretics at doses commonly used in clinical practice, patients who received chlorthalidone did not have a lower occurrence of major cardiovascular outcome events or non-cancer-related deaths than patients who received hydrochlorothiazide. (Funded by the Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02185417.).

TAAR1 agonist ulotaront delays gastric emptying of solids in patients with schizophrenia and concurrent metabolic syndrome with prediabetes.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic syndrome (MetS), which can be induced or exacerbated by the current class of antipsychotic drugs, is highly prevalent in patients with schizophrenia and presents significant challenges to lifetime disease management. Supported by initial clinical results, trace amine-associated receptor 1 (TAAR1) agonists have emerged as potential novel treatments for schizophrenia. Notably, non-clinical studies have also shown weight-lowering and glucoregulatory effects of TAAR1 agonists, including the investigational agent ulotaront. However, the translatability of these findings to humans has not been adequately assessed. Given that delayed gastric emptying (GE) was identified as a potential mechanism contributing to the metabolic benefits of TAAR1 agonists in rodents, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of ulotaront on GE in patients with schizophrenia and concurrent MetS with prediabetes. METHODS: Patients with schizophrenia were randomized to receive a single oral dose of ulotaront (150 mg) and their previous antipsychotic (PA) in an open-label, crossover, two-sequence design (NCT05402111). Eligible participants fulfilled at least three of five MetS criteria and had prediabetes defined by elevated glycated haemoglobin (5.7-6.4%) and/or fasting homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (i.e. ≥2.22). Following an overnight fast and 4 h post-dose, participants ingested a 99mTc-sulphur colloid radiolabelled egg meal (320 kcal, 30% fat). GE was measured by scintigraphy over 4 h. Endpoints included GE of solids half-time (T1/2) and percentage gastric retention at 1, 2 and 4 h. RESULTS: Thirty-one adults were randomized and 27 completed the study. Ulotaront significantly delayed GE of solids [median GE T1/2 ulotaront at 139 min (119, 182) vs. the participant's PA of 124 min (109, 132), p = .006]. A significant increase in gastric retention was seen in the ulotaront versus the PA group at 1 h (80% vs. 75%, p = .015), 2 h (61% vs. 50%, p = .023) and 4 h (17% vs. 7%, p = .002) post-meal. CONCLUSION: Ulotaront delayed the GE of solids in patients with schizophrenia and concurrent MetS with prediabetes. Additional studies are needed to assess whether treatment with TAAR1 agonists is associated with weight loss and glucoregulatory improvement.

Practical issues in pragmatic trials: the implementation of the Diuretic Comparison Project.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The US Department of Veterans Affairs Point of Care Clinical Trial Program conducts studies that utilize informatics infrastructure to integrate clinical trial protocols into routine care delivery. The Diuretic Comparison Project compared hydrochlorothiazide to chlorthalidone in reduction of major cardiovascular events in subjects with hypertension. Here we describe the cultural, technical, regulatory, and logistical challenges and solutions that enabled successful implementation of this large pragmatic comparative effectiveness Point of Care clinical trial. METHODS: Patients were recruited from 72 Veterans Affairs Healthcare Systems using centralized processes for subject identification, obtaining informed consent, data collection, safety monitoring, site communication, and endpoint identification with minimal perturbation of the local clinical care ecosystem. Patients continued to be managed exclusively by their clinical care providers without protocol specified study visits, treatment recommendations, or data collection extraneous to routine care. Centralized study processes were operationalized through the application layer of the electronic health record via a data coordinating center staffed by clinical nurses, data scientists, and statisticians without site-based research coordinators. Study data was collected from the Veterans Affairs electronic health record supplemented by Medicare and National Death Index data. RESULTS: The study exceeded its enrolled goal (13,523 subjects) and followed subjects for the 5-year study duration. The key determinant of program success was collaboration between researchers, regulators, clinicians, and administrative staff at the site level to customize study procedures to align with local clinical practice. This flexibility was enabled by designation of the study as minimal risk and determination that clinical care providers were not engaged in research by the Veterans Affairs Central Institutional Review Board. Cultural, regulatory, technical, and logistical problems were identified and solved through iterative collaboration between clinical and research entities. Paramount among these problems was customization of the Veterans Affairs electronic health record and data systems to accommodate study procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Leveraging clinical care for large-scale clinical trials is feasible but requires a rethinking of traditional clinical trial design (and regulation) to better meet requirements of clinical care ecosystems. Study designs must accommodate site-specific practice variation to reduce the impact on clinical care. A tradeoff thus exists between designing trial processes tailored to expedite local study implementation versus those to produce a more refined response to the research question. The availability of a uniform and flexible electronic health record in the Department of Veterans Affairs played a major role in the success of the trial. Conducting Point of Care research in other healthcare systems without such research-friendly infrastructure presents a more formidable challenge.

COlchicine to Prevent PeriprocEdural Myocardial Injury in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (COPE-PCI): Coronary Microvascular Physiology Pilot Substudy.

Aim: In this randomized pilot trial, we aimed to assess the anti-inflammatory effect of preprocedural colchicine on coronary microvascular physiology measurements before and after PCI. Methods: Patients undergoing PCI for stable angina (SA) or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) were randomized to oral colchicine or placebo, 6- to 24-hours before the procedure. Strict prespecified inclusion/exclusion criteria were set to ensure all patients were given the study medication, had a PCI, and had pre- and post-PCI culprit vessel invasive coronary physiology measurements. Fractional flow reserve (FFR), Index of Microvascular Resistance (IMR), Coronary Flow Reserve (CFR), and Resistive Reserve Ratio (RRR) were measured immediately before and after PCI. CMVD was defined as any one of post-PCI IMR >32 or CFR <2 or RRR <2. High-sensitive-(hs)-troponin-I, hsCRP, and leucocyte count were measured before and 24 hours after PCI. Results: A total of 50 patients were randomized and met the strict prespecified inclusion/exclusion criteria: 24-colchicine and 26-placebo. Pre-PCI coronary physiology measurements, hs-troponin-I, and hsCRP were similar between groups. Although numerically lower in patients given colchicine, the proportion of patients who developed CMVD was not significantly different between groups (colchicine: 10 (42%) vs placebo: 16 (62%), p=0.16). Colchicine patients had higher post-PCI CFR and RRR vs placebo (respectively: 3.25 vs 2.00, p=0.03 & 4.25 vs 2.75, p < 0.01). Neutrophil count was lower after PCI in the colchicine arm (p=0.02), and hsCRP post-PCI remained low in both treatment arms (1.0 mg/L vs 1.7 mg/L, p=0.97). Patients randomized to colchicine had significantly less PCI-related absolute hs-troponin-I change (46 ng/L vs 152 ng/L, p=0.01). Conclusion: In this pilot randomized substudy, colchicine given 6 to 24 hours before PCI did not statistically impact the post-PCI CMVD definition used in this study, yet it did improve post-PCI RRR and CFR measurements, with less procedure-related troponin release and less inflammation.

SEP-363856, a Novel Psychotropic Agent with a Unique, Non-D2 Receptor Mechanism of Action.

For the past 50 years, the clinical efficacy of antipsychotic medications has relied on blockade of dopamine D2 receptors. Drug development of non-D2 compounds, seeking to avoid the limiting side effects of dopamine receptor blockade, has failed to date to yield new medicines for patients. In this work, we report the discovery of SEP-363856 (SEP-856), a novel psychotropic agent with a unique mechanism of action. SEP-856 was discovered in a medicinal chemistry effort utilizing a high throughput, high content, mouse-behavior phenotyping platform, in combination with in vitro screening, aimed at developing non-D2 (anti-target) compounds that could nevertheless retain efficacy across multiple animal models sensitive to D2-based pharmacological mechanisms. SEP-856 demonstrated broad efficacy in putative rodent models relating to aspects of schizophrenia, including phencyclidine (PCP)-induced hyperactivity, prepulse inhibition, and PCP-induced deficits in social interaction. In addition to its favorable pharmacokinetic properties, lack of D2 receptor occupancy, and the absence of catalepsy, SEP-856's broad profile was further highlighted by its robust suppression of rapid eye movement sleep in rats. Although the mechanism of action has not been fully elucidated, in vitro and in vivo pharmacology data as well as slice and in vivo electrophysiology recordings suggest that agonism at both trace amine-associated receptor 1 and 5-HT1A receptors is integral to its efficacy. Based on the preclinical data and its unique mechanism of action, SEP-856 is a promising new agent for the treatment of schizophrenia and represents a new pharmacological class expected to lack the side effects stemming from blockade of D2 signaling. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Since the discovery of chlorpromazine in the 1950s, the clinical efficacy of antipsychotic medications has relied on blockade of dopamine D2 receptors, which is associated with substantial side effects and little to no efficacy in treating the negative and cognitive symptoms of schizophrenia. In this study, we describe the discovery and pharmacology of SEP-363856, a novel psychotropic agent that does not exert its antipsychotic-like effects through direct interaction with D2 receptors. Although the mechanism of action has not been fully elucidated, our data suggest that agonism at both trace amine-associated receptor 1 and 5-HT1A receptors is integral to its efficacy. Based on its unique profile in preclinical species, SEP-363856 represents a promising candidate for the treatment of schizophrenia and potentially other neuropsychiatric disorders.

The Collaborative Chronic Care Model for Mental Health Conditions: From Evidence Synthesis to Policy Impact to Scale-up and Spread.

BACKGROUND: Extensive evidence indicates that Collaborative Chronic Care Models (CCMs) improve outcome in chronic medical conditions and depression treated in primary care. Beginning with an evidence synthesis which indicated that CCMs are also effective for multiple mental health conditions, we describe a multistage process that translated this knowledge into evidence-based health system change in the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: In 2010, recognizing that there had been numerous CCM trials for a wide variety of mental health conditions, we conducted an evidence synthesis compiling randomized controlled trials of CCMs for any mental health condition. The systematic review demonstrated CCM effectiveness across mental health conditions and treatment venues. Cumulative meta-analysis and meta-regression further informed our approach to subsequent CCM implementation. POLICY IMPACT: In 2015, based on the evidence synthesis, VA Office of Mental Health and Suicide Prevention (OMHSP) adopted the CCM as the model for their outpatient mental health teams. RANDOMIZED IMPLEMENTATION TRIAL: In 2015-2018 we partnered with OMHSP to conduct a 9-site stepped wedge implementation trial, guided by insights from the evidence synthesis. SCALE-UP AND SPREAD: In 2017 OMHSP launched an effort to scale-up and spread the CCM to additional VA medical centers. Seventeen facilitators were trained and 28 facilities engaged in facilitation. DISCUSSION: Evidence synthesis provided leverage for evidence-based policy change. This formed the foundation for a health care leadership/researcher partnership, which conducted an implementation trial and subsequent scale-up and spread effort to enhance adoption of the CCM, as informed by the evidence synthesis.

Therapies for active rheumatoid arthritis after methotrexate failure.

BACKGROUND: Few blinded trials have compared conventional therapy consisting of a combination of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs with biologic agents in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who have active disease despite treatment with methotrexate--a common scenario in the management of rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: We conducted a 48-week, double-blind, noninferiority trial in which we randomly assigned 353 participants with rheumatoid arthritis who had active disease despite methotrexate therapy to a triple regimen of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (methotrexate, sulfasalazine, and hydroxychloroquine) or etanercept plus methotrexate. Patients who did not have an improvement at 24 weeks according to a prespecified threshold were switched in a blinded fashion to the other therapy. The primary outcome was improvement in the Disease Activity Score for 28-joint counts (DAS28, with scores ranging from 2 to 10 and higher scores indicating more disease activity) at week 48. RESULTS: Both groups had significant improvement over the course of the first 24 weeks (P=0.001 for the comparison with baseline). A total of 27% of participants in each group required a switch in treatment at 24 weeks. Participants in both groups who switched therapies had improvement after switching (P<0.001), and the response after switching did not differ significantly between the two groups (P=0.08). The change between baseline and 48 weeks in the DAS28 was similar in the two groups (-2.1 with triple therapy and -2.3 with etanercept and methotrexate, P=0.26); triple therapy was noninferior to etanercept and methotrexate, since the 95% upper confidence limit of 0.41 for the difference in change in DAS28 was below the margin for noninferiority of 0.6 (P=0.002). There were no significant between-group differences in secondary outcomes, including radiographic progression, pain, and health-related quality of life, or in major adverse events associated with the medications. CONCLUSIONS: With respect to clinical benefit, triple therapy, with sulfasalazine and hydroxychloroquine added to methotrexate, was noninferior to etanercept plus methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had active disease despite methotrexate therapy. (Funded by the Cooperative Studies Program, Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Research and Development, and others; CSP 551 RACAT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00405275.)

Validation of Photograph-Based Toxicity Score for Topical 5-Fluorouracil Cream Application.

BACKGROUND: An objective tool quantifying the toxicity of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) from photographs was recently reported, and its reliability was confirmed. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to validate the photograph-based toxicity score. METHODS: Photograph-based toxicity scores of participants assigned to the 5-FU arm of a randomized placebo-controlled trial were tested for correlations with their patient-reported symptom scores and baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Each pair of individual and overall scores of patient-reported symptoms and photograph-based toxicity was correlated at 2 and 4 weeks (correlation coefficient range, 0.34-0.95; P < .001 for all). Older age, more actinic keratoses, previous topical 5-FU use, and more keratinocyte carcinomas on the face and ears in the previous 5 years were correlated with increased 5-FU toxicity at 2 weeks (P < .05). An increase in the total number of 5-FU applications during the trial was correlated with less severe toxicity at 2 weeks (P < .001), but with increased toxicity at 4 weeks (P < .001). CONCLUSION: This study provides evidence for construct validity of the photograph-based 5-FU toxicity score. The tool can be used to objectively measure 5-FU toxicity in clinical or research setting, and it can be a prototype for toxicity measurements of other topical medications.

The impact of missing data on the results of a schizophrenia study.

Missing data pose a serious challenge to the integrity of randomized clinical trials, especially of treatments for prolonged illnesses such as schizophrenia, in which long-term impact assessment is of great importance, but the follow-up rates are often no more than 50%. Sensitivity analysis using Bayesian modeling for missing data offers a systematic approach to assessing the sensitivity of the inferences made on the basis of observed data. This paper uses data from an 18-month study of veterans with schizophrenia to demonstrate this approach. Data were obtained from a randomized clinical trial involving 369 patients diagnosed with schizophrenia that compared long-acting injectable risperidone with a psychiatrist's choice of oral treatment. Bayesian analysis utilizing a pattern-mixture modeling approach was used to validate the reported results by detecting bias due to non-random patterns of missing data. The analysis was applied to several outcomes including standard measures of schizophrenia symptoms, quality of life, alcohol use, and global mental status. The original study results for several measures were confirmed against a wide range of patterns of non-random missingness. Robustness of the conclusions was assessed using sensitivity parameters. The missing data in the trial did not likely threaten the validity of previously reported results.

Long-acting risperidone and oral antipsychotics in unstable schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Long-acting injectable risperidone, a second-generation antipsychotic agent, may improve adherence to treatment and outcomes in schizophrenia, but it has not been tested in a long-term randomized trial involving patients with unstable disease. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients in the Veterans Affairs (VA) system who had schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder and who had been hospitalized within the previous 2 years or were at imminent risk for hospitalization to 25 to 50 mg of long-acting injectable risperidone every two weeks or to a psychiatrist's choice of an oral antipsychotic. All patients were followed for up to 2 years. The primary end point was hospitalization in a VA or non-VA psychiatric hospital. Symptoms, quality of life, and functioning were assessed in blinded videoconference interviews. RESULTS: Of 369 participants, 40% were hospitalized at randomization, 55% were hospitalized within the previous 2 years, and 5% were at risk for hospitalization. The rate of hospitalization after randomization was not significantly lower among patients who received long-acting injectable risperidone than among those who received oral antipsychotics (39% after 10.8 months vs. 45% after 11.3 months; hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.63 to 1.20). Psychiatric symptoms, quality of life, scores on the Personal and Social Performance scale of global functioning, and neurologic side effects were not significantly improved with long-acting injectable risperidone as compared with control treatments. Patients who received long-acting injectable risperidone reported more adverse events at the injection site and more extrapyramidal symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Long-acting injectable risperidone was not superior to a psychiatrist's choice of oral treatment in patients with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder who were hospitalized or at high risk for hospitalization, and it was associated with more local injection-site and extrapyramidal adverse effects. (Supported by the VA Cooperative Studies Program and Ortho-McNeil Janssen Scientific Affairs; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00132314.).

Differences in treatment effect among clinical subgroups in a randomized clinical trial of long-acting injectable risperidone and oral antipsychotics in unstable chronic schizophrenia.

A long-term randomized trial of unstable patients with schizophrenia found no benefit of long-acting injectable (LAI) risperidone over oral treatment in preventing or delaying time to psychiatric hospitalizations or on clinical outcomes. The initial analyses did not examine whether benefits of LAI emerged in selected subgroups.Patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who had been hospitalized within the past 2 years or judged to be at risk for hospitalization because of increasing psychiatric service use were randomly assigned to LAI risperidone 12.5 to 50 mg per injection biweekly or to the psychiatrist's choice of oral antipsychotics and followed for up to 2 years. The primary endpoint was psychiatric rehospitalization. Symptoms, quality of life, and global functioning were assessed through blinded videoconference interviews. Cox's regression and mixed effects models were used to assess difference in treatment effect within 12 subgroups defined by hospitalization at study entry, substance abuse, race, symptom severity, quality of life, body mass index, age, race or sex, or reported medication compliance.Mixed models and Cox's regression using up to 24 months of follow-up data showed no significant differences in treatment effect in 10 of 12 subgroups on psychiatric symptoms, quality of life, or time to hospitalization. With adjustment for multiple comparisons, treatment effect differed by race on substance use outcomes, with white participants showing more benefit from LAI than other groups.LAI risperidone showed no superiority to psychiatrist's choice of oral treatment in most clinically defined subgroups, although the white patients benefited more than the other groups on substance abuse outcomes.

A Novel Method for Deriving Adverse Event Prevalence in Randomized Controlled Trials: Potential for Improved Understanding of Benefit-Risk Ratio and Application to Drug Labels.

INTRODUCTION: Adverse event (AE) data in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) allow quantification of a drug's safety risk relative to placebo and comparison across medications. The standard US label for Food and Drug Administration-approved drugs typically lists AEs by MedDRA Preferred Term that occur at ≥ 2% in drug and with greater incidence than in placebo. We suggest that the drug label can be more informative for both patients and physicians if it includes, in addition to AE incidence (percent of subjects who reported the AE out of the total subjects in treatment), the absolute prevalence (percent of subject-days spent with an AE out of the total subject-days spent in treatment) and expected duration (days required for AE incidence to be reduced by half). We also propose a new method to analyze AEs in RCTs using drug-placebo difference in AE prevalence to improve safety signal detection. METHODS: AE data from six RCTs in schizophrenia were analyzed (five RCTs of the dopamine D2 receptor-based antipsychotic lurasidone and one RCT of the novel trace amine-associated receptor 1 [TAAR1] agonist ulotaront). We determined incidence, absolute prevalence, and expected duration of AEs for lurasidone and ulotaront vs respective placebo. We also calculated areas under the curve of drug-placebo difference in AE prevalence and mean percent contribution of each AE to this difference. RESULTS: A number of AEs with the same incidence had different absolute prevalence and expected duration. When accounting for these two parameters, AEs that did not appear in the 2% incidence tables of the drug label turned out to contribute substantially to drug tolerability. The percent contribution of a drug-related AE to the overall side effect burden increased the drug-placebo difference in AE prevalence, whereas the percent contribution of a placebo-related AE decreased such difference, revealing a continuum of risk between drug and placebo. AE prevalence curves for drug were generally greater than those for placebo. Ulotaront exhibited a small drug-placebo difference in AE prevalence curves due to a relatively low incidence and short duration of AEs in the ulotaront treatment arm as well as the emergence of disease-related AEs in the placebo arm. CONCLUSION: Reporting AE absolute prevalence and expected duration for each RCT and incorporating them in the drug label is possible, is clinically relevant, and allows standardized comparison of medications. Our new metric, the drug-placebo difference in AE prevalence, facilitates signal detection in RCTs. We piloted this metric in RCTs of several neuropsychiatric indications and drugs, offering a new way to compare AE burden and tolerability among treatments using existing clinical trial information.

Chlorthalidone vs Hydrochlorothiazide for Hypertension Treatment After Myocardial Infarction or Stroke: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke have a greater risk of recurrent cardiovascular (CV) events. Objective: To evaluate the association of chlorthalidone (CTD) vs hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) with CV outcomes and noncancer deaths in participants with and without prior MI or stroke. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a prespecified secondary analysis of the Diuretic Comparison Project (DCP), a pragmatic randomized clinical trial conducted within 72 participating Veterans Affairs health care systems from June 2016 to June 2021, in which patients aged 65 years or older with hypertension taking HCTZ at baseline were randomized to continue HCTZ or switch to CTD at pharmacologically comparable doses. This secondary analysis was performed from January 3, 2023, to February 29, 2024. Exposures: Pharmacologically comparable daily dose of HCTZ or CTD and history of MI or stroke. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcome ascertainment was performed from randomization to the end of the study. The primary outcome consisted of a composite of stroke, MI, urgent coronary revascularization because of unstable angina, acute heart failure hospitalization, or noncancer death. Additional outcomes included achieved blood pressure and hypokalemia (potassium level <3.1 mEq/L; to convert to mmol/L, multiply by 1.0). Results: The DCP randomized 13 523 participants to CTD or HCTZ, with a mean (SD) study duration of 2.4 (1.4) years. At baseline, median age was 72 years (IQR, 69-75 years), and 96.8% were male. Treatment effect was evaluated in subgroups of participants with (n = 1455) and without (n = 12 068) prior MI or stroke at baseline. There was a significant adjusted interaction between treatment group and history of MI or stroke. Participants with prior MI or stroke randomized to CTD had a lower risk of the primary outcome than those receiving HCTZ (105 of 733 [14.3%] vs 140 of 722 [19.4%]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.57-0.94; P = .01) compared with participants without prior MI or stroke, among whom incidence of the primary outcome was slightly higher in the CTD arm compared with the HCTZ arm (597 of 6023 [9.9%] vs 535 of 6045 [8.9%]; HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.00-1.26; P = .054) (P = .01 for interaction). The incidence of a nadir potassium level less than 3.1 mEq/L and hospitalization for hypokalemia differed among those with and without prior MI or stroke when comparing those randomized to CTD vs HCTZ, with a difference only among those without prior MI or stroke (potassium level <3.1 mEq/L: prior MI or stroke, 43 of 733 [5.9%] vs 37 of 722 [5.1%] [P = .57]; no prior MI or stroke, 292 of 6023 [4.9%] vs 206 of 6045 [3.4%] [P < .001]; hospitalization for hypokalemia: prior MI or stroke, 14 of 733 [1.9%] vs 16 of 722 [2.2%] [P = .72]; no prior MI or stroke: 84 of 6023 [1.4%] vs 57 of 6045 [0.9%] [P = .02]). Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this secondary analysis of the DCP trial suggest that CTD may be associated with reduced major adverse CV events and noncancer deaths in patients with prior MI or stroke compared with HCTZ. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02185417.

Discovery and Model-Informed Drug Development of a Controlled-Release Formulation of Nonracemic Amisulpride that Reduces Plasma Exposure but Achieves Pharmacodynamic Bioequivalence in the Brain.

Nonracemic amisulpride (SEP-4199) is an investigational 85:15 ratio of aramisulpride to esamisulpride and currently in clinical trials for the treatment of bipolar depression. During testing of SEP-4199, a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) disconnect was discovered that prompted the development of a controlled-release (CR) formulation with improved therapeutic index for QT prolongation. Observations that supported the development of a CR formulation included (i) plasma concentrations of amisulpride enantiomers were cleared within 24-hours, but brain dopamine D2 receptor (D2R) occupancies, although achieving stable levels during this time, required 5 days to return to baseline; (ii) nonracemic amisulpride administered to non-human primates produced significantly greater D2R occupancies during a gradual 6-hour administration compared with a single bolus; (iii) concentration-occupancy curves were left-shifted in humans when nonracemic amisulpride was gradually administered over 3 and 6 hours compared with immediate delivery; (iv) CR solid oral dose formulations of nonracemic amisulpride were able to slow drug dissolution in vitro and reduce peak plasma exposures in vivo in human subjects. By mathematically solving for a drug distribution step into an effect compartment, and for binding to target receptors, the discovery of a novel PK/PD model (termed here as Distribution Model) accounted for hysteresis between plasma and brain, a lack of receptor saturation, and an absence of accumulation of drug occupancy with daily doses. The PK/PD disconnect solved by the Distribution Model provided model-informed drug development to continue in Phase III using the non-bioequivalent CR formulation with diminished QT prolongation as dose-equivalent to the immediate release (IR) formulation utilized in Phase II.

A comprehensive care management program to prevent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease hospitalizations: a randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Improving a patient's ability to self-monitor and manage changes in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) symptoms may improve outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of a comprehensive care management program (CCMP) in reducing the risk for COPD hospitalization. DESIGN: A randomized, controlled trial comparing CCMP with guideline-based usual care. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00395083) SETTING: 20 Veterans Affairs hospital-based outpatient clinics. PARTICIPANTS: Patients hospitalized for COPD in the past year. INTERVENTION: The CCMP included COPD education during 4 individual sessions and 1 group session, an action plan for identification and treatment of exacerbations, and scheduled proactive telephone calls for case management. Patients in both the intervention and usual care groups received a COPD informational booklet; their primary care providers received a copy of COPD guidelines and were advised to manage their patients according to these guidelines. Patients were randomly assigned, stratifying by site based on random, permuted blocks of variable size. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was time to first COPD hospitalization. Staff blinded to study group performed telephone-based assessment of COPD exacerbations and hospitalizations, and all hospitalizations were blindly adjudicated. Secondary outcomes included non-COPD health care use, all-cause mortality, health-related quality of life, patient satisfaction, disease knowledge, and self-efficacy. RESULTS: Of the eligible patients, 209 were randomly assigned to the intervention group and 217 to the usual care group. Citing serious safety concerns, the data monitoring committee terminated the intervention before the trial's planned completion after 426 (44%) of the planned total of 960 patients were enrolled. Mean follow-up was 250 days. When the study was stopped, the 1-year cumulative incidence of COPD-related hospitalization was 27% in the intervention group and 24% in the usual care group (hazard ratio, 1.13 [95% CI, 0.70 to 1.80]; P= 0.62). There were 28 deaths from all causes in the intervention group versus 10 in the usual care group (hazard ratio, 3.00 [CI, 1.46 to 6.17]; P= 0.003). Cause could be assigned in 27 (71%) deaths. Deaths due to COPD accounted for the largest difference: 10 in the intervention group versus 3 in the usual care group (hazard ratio, 3.60 [CI, 0.99 to 13.08]; P= 0.053). LIMITATIONS: Available data could not fully explain the excess mortality in the intervention group. Ability to assess the quality of the educational sessions provided by the case managers was limited. CONCLUSION: A CCMP in patients with severe COPD had not decreased COPD-related hospitalizations when the trial was stopped prematurely. The CCMP was associated with unanticipated excess mortality, results that differ markedly from similar previous trials. A data monitoring committee should be considered in the design of clinical trials involving behavioral interventions.

Veteran subjects willingness to participate in schizophrenia clinical trials.

Predictive characteristics of subjects agreeing to be randomized into clinical trials for the treatment of schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder have been little studied. In this study, we used data from the recruitment phase of a randomized trial that compared long acting injectable (LAI) risperidone to oral antipsychotic medications. Basic socio-demographic and clinical data were gathered from eligible patients and clinicians at the time of screening for trial entry. Bivariate comparisons and multivariate logistic regression were used to compare those who agreed to participate and those who refused. Altogether 446 veterans were eligible on preliminary screening, of these 382 (86 %) agreed to participate and 64 (14 %) declined. Eligible patients who agreed to be randomized were more willing to change medications without regard to their level of satisfaction with their current medication. Subjects reported as currently taking LAI medication and taking risperidone, in particular, were more likely to agree to participate. Factors that did not significantly predict participation included age, years on current medication, reported medication compliance, race, and gender. Veterans with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who were actually more satisfied with their current medications and who were currently taking the experimental agent were more likely to agree to participate in this randomized clinical trial in contrast to expectations that individuals who are unsatisfied with their current treatment would be more likely to enroll in such studies.

Challenges in the clinical development of non-D2 compounds for schizophrenia.

Schizophrenia is a chronic, heterogeneous, severe psychiatric disorder characterized by a spectrum of symptomology and is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. For the last 70 years, available treatments have shared blockade of dopamine D2 receptors as their primary mechanism of action (MOA), the efficacy of which has been limited by incomplete resolution of all symptoms as well as treatment non-response in a select subset of patients. In addition, antipsychotics are associated with class-related side effects attributed to this primary MOA, including extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS). The need for non-D2 treatment options for patients which offer a novel risk/benefit profile is therefore apparent. There has been substantial investment in the research and development of non-D2 drug candidates. However, none of these programs have received successful regulatory approval by the FDA (as of Oct 2022). In this article, the scale of industry-sponsored clinical trials for D2-based investigational pharmacological treatments in schizophrenia was quantified and compared with investigational compounds with non-D2 MOAs. In a dataset of 545 clinical trials identified in ClinicalTrials.gov from January 2002 to July 2022, total enrollments in trials of non-D2-based compounds for the treatment of schizophrenia summed to approximately 34,000 patients, compared with 27,144 patients for D2-based compounds. These data indicate that there remains substantial and ongoing investment in the development of novel non-D2 options for schizophrenia, with a success rate measured by regulatory approval that is well-below recent benchmarks for the broader category of CNS drugs. Improved trial design, conduct, endpoints, and analyses/methods may influence signal detection and reliability to support development and registration of non-D2 compounds.

A multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, Phase 1b crossover trial comparing two doses of ulotaront with placebo in the treatment of narcolepsy-cataplexy.

BACKGROUND: Ulotaront (SEP-363856) is a novel agonist at trace amine-associated receptor 1 and serotonin 5-HT1A receptors in clinical development for the treatment of schizophrenia. Previous studies demonstrated ulotaront suppresses rapid eye movement (REM) sleep in both rodents and healthy volunteers. We assessed acute and sustained treatments of ulotaront on REM sleep and symptoms of cataplexy and alertness in subjects with narcolepsy-cataplexy. METHODS: In a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, 3-way crossover study, ulotaront was evaluated in 16 adults with narcolepsy-cataplexy. Two oral doses of ulotaront (25 mg and 50 mg) were administered daily for 2 weeks and compared with matching placebo (6-treatment sequence, 3-period, 3-treatment). RESULTS: Acute treatment with both 25 mg and 50 mg of ulotaront reduced minutes spent in nighttime REM compared to placebo. A sustained 2-week administration of both doses of ulotaront reduced the mean number of short-onset REM periods (SOREMPs) during daytime multiple sleep latency test (MSLT) compared to placebo. Although cataplexy events decreased from the overall mean baseline during the 2-week treatment period, neither dose of ulotaront statistically separated from placebo (p = 0.76, 25 mg; p = 0.82, 50 mg), and no significant improvement in patient and clinician measures of sleepiness from baseline to end of the 2-week treatment period occurred in any treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: Acute and sustained treatment with ulotaront reduced nighttime REM duration and daytime SOREMPs, respectively. The effect of ulotaront on suppression of REM did not demonstrate a statistical or clinically meaningful effect in narcolepsy-cataplexy. REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05015673.

Estimating the per-protocol effect of lithium on suicidality in a randomized trial of individuals with depression or bipolar disorder.

BACKGROUND: The CSP590 randomized trial was designed to estimate the effect of lithium on suicidality. After a third of the intended number of participants were enrolled, the hazard ratio of suicidality was 1.10 (95% CI: 0.77, 1.55). Based on this, the trial was stopped for futility. However, only 17% of patients adhered to the specified protocol. AIMS: The objective was to estimate the per-protocol effect of lithium on suicidality, that is, the effect of adhering to the treatment strategies as specified in the protocol. METHODS: We stopped individuals' follow-up if/when they showed evidence of nonadherence. We then conducted the analysis in the restricted sample, adjusting for prognostic factors that predict adherence via inverse probability weighting. The primary outcome was the 12-month risk of suicidality (including death from suicide, suicide attempt, interrupted attempt, hospitalization specifically to prevent suicide). RESULTS: The estimated 12-month risk of suicidality was 18.8% for lithium, and 24.3% for placebo. The risk ratio was 0.78 (95% CI: 0.43, 1.37) and the risk difference -5.5 percentage points (95% CI: -17.5, 5.5). Results were consistent across sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: With one-third of the targeted sample size, lithium effects (compared with placebo) ranging between a 17.5% reduction and a 5.5% increase in the risk of suicidality were highly compatible with the data. Thus, a protective effect of lithium on suicidality among patients with bipolar disorder or major depressive disorder cannot be ruled out. Trials should incorporate adequate per-protocol analyses into the decision-making processes for stopping trials for futility.

Using the Matrixed Multiple Case Study approach to identify factors affecting the uptake of IPV screening programs following the use of implementation facilitation.

BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a prevalent social determinant of health. The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends routine IPV screening of women, but uptake remains variable. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) initiated implementation facilitation (IF) to support integration of IPV screening programs into primary care clinics. An evaluation of IF efforts showed variability in IPV screening rates across sites. The follow-up study presented here used a Matrixed Multiple Case Study (MMCS) approach to examine the multilevel factors impacting IPV screening program implementation across sites with varying levels of implementation success. METHODS: This mixed methods study is part of a larger cluster randomized stepped wedge Hybrid-II program evaluation. In the larger trial, participating sites received 6 months of IF consisting of an external facilitator from VHA's Office of Women's Health working closely with an internal facilitator and key site personnel. Recognizing the heterogeneity in implementation outcomes across sites, the MMCS approach was used to enable interpretation of qualitative and quantitative data within and across sites to help contextualize the primary findings from the larger study. Qualitative data collection was guided by the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework and included interviews with key informants involved in IPV screening implementation at eight sites. Quantitative data on IPV screening uptake was derived from medical records and surveys completed by key personnel at the same eight sites to understand implementation facilitation activities. RESULTS: Fifteen factors influencing IPV screening implementation spanning all four i-PARIHS domains were identified and categorized into three distinct categories: (1) factors with enabling influence across all sites, (2) factors deemed important to implementation success, and (3) factors differentiating sites with high/medium versus low implementation success. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the influencing factors across multi-level domains contributing to variable success of IPV screening implementation can inform the tailoring of IF efforts to promote spread and quality of screening. Implementation of IPV screening programs in primary care with IF should consider consistent engagement of internal facilitators with clinic staff involved in implementation, the resourcefulness of external facilitators, and appending resources to IPV screening tools to help key personnel address positive screens. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04106193. Registered on September 26, 2019.