Efficacy and safety of golimumab in patients with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis: a withdrawal and retreatment study (GO-BACK).

OBJECTIVES: The GO-BACK study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of golimumab (GLM) treatment withdrawal in adults with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) who demonstrate inactive disease during a 10-month open-label (OL) GLM run-in. METHODS: Eligible participants received OL GLM in period 1. In period 2, participants who achieved inactive disease were randomized 1:1:1 to receive double-blind (DB) treatment with monthly placebo (PBO, treatment withdrawal) or continued GLM treatment given monthly (GLM QMT) or every 2 months (GLM Q2MT). Participants who did not have a disease flare continued DB treatment for ∼12 months. Participants with a disease flare discontinued DB treatment and resumed monthly OL GLM. Primary endpoint compared the proportion of participants without a disease flare in the continued GLM treatment groups (QMT or Q2MT) vs PBO in a multiplicity-controlled, step-down fashion. Safety follow-up continued for ∼3 months after last treatment. RESULTS: A total of 188 patients, out of the 323 enrolled, were eligible for participation in period 2. Both GLM QMT and GLM Q2MT were superior to treatment withdrawal (PBO) in preventing disease flare (P < 0.001), with a treatment-difference vs PBO of 50.4% and 34.4% for the GLM QMT and GLM Q2MT groups, respectively. The time-to-first flare was significantly longer (log-rank P < 0.0001) with GLM treatment compared with PBO. Of 53 participants (in Q2MT or PBO) who had a confirmed disease flare, 51 (96.2%) attained a clinical response within 3 months of restarting OL GLM. Adverse events were consistent with the known GLM safety profile. CONCLUSION: Among participants with active nr-axSpA who attained inactive disease after 10 months of GLM treatment, continued GLM treatment is well tolerated and provides superior protection against disease flares compared with GLM withdrawal. (EudraCT: 2015-004020-65, registered on 30 March 2022; NCT: 03253796, registered on 18 August 2017.).

Single-dose fosaprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens: a subgroup analysis from a randomized clinical trial of response in subjects by cancer type.

BACKGROUND: Results from a phase III, randomized, double-blind, active comparator-controlled, parallel-group trial evaluating fosaprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) found that a single-day, triple-antiemetic fosaprepitant regimen resulted in a significantly higher proportion of patients achieving a complete response (CR; no vomiting or rescue medication use) in the delayed phase (25-120 h after chemotherapy initiation), compared with a 3-day control regimen ( ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01594749). As the risk for CINV is dependent on chemotherapy regimen and generally guided by tumor type, this post hoc analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of this regimen by cancer subpopulations (gastrointestinal [GI] or colorectal, lung, breast, and gynecologic cancers). METHODS: Subjects with confirmed cancer who were naive to highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC and MEC) and were scheduled to receive intravenous (IV) anthracycline-cyclophosphamide (AC)-based MEC on the first day of chemotherapy were randomly assigned to receive oral ondansetron and oral dexamethasone plus either a single IV dose of fosaprepitant 150 mg (fosaprepitant regimen) or placebo (control regimen). The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of subjects achieving CR in the delayed phase. CR rates in the overall and acute phases (0-120 h and 0-24 h after MEC initiation, respectively) were assessed as secondary end points. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. RESULTS: CR rates in the delayed phase favored the fosaprepitant regimen over the control regimen across the GI/colorectal, lung, breast, and gynecologic cancer subgroups (range, 6.2-22%); similar findings were observed for CR in the overall phase. CR in the acute phase was high for all groups (≥87%). The fosaprepitant regimen was well tolerated in all cancer subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: This post hoc analysis indicated that a single-day fosaprepitant regimen was effective in preventing CINV in patients receiving MEC, regardless of cancer type. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01594749 , registered May 9, 2012.

Serious asthma events with mometasone furoate plus formoterol compared with mometasone furoate.

BACKGROUND: The safety of long-acting ß-agonists added to inhaled corticosteroids for the treatment of persistent asthma has been controversial. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether administering formoterol in combination with mometasone furoate increases the risk of serious asthma outcomes (SAOs) compared with mometasone furoate alone. This clinical trial is registered as NCT01471340. METHODS: We conducted a 26-week, randomized, double-blind trial in adolescent and adult patients (≥12 years) with persistent asthma in 35 countries with the primary objective of evaluating whether mometasone furoate-formoterol increases the risk of SAOs (adjudicated hospitalization, intubation, or death) compared with mometasone furoate alone. The key efficacy end point was asthma exacerbation (composite of hospitalization of ≥24 hours, emergency department visits of <24 hours requiring systemic corticosteroids, or use of systemic corticosteroids for ≥3 consecutive days). RESULTS: Among 11,729 patients (mometasone furoate-formoterol, n = 5,868; mometasone furoate, n = 5,861), a total of 81 SAOs, all asthma-related hospitalizations, were observed in 71 patients: 45 events from 39 patients receiving mometasone furoate-formoterol and 36 events from 32 patients receiving mometasone furoate. The hazard ratio for the first SAO in the mometasone furoate-formoterol versus mometasone furoate group was 1.22 (95% CI, 0.76-1.94; P = .411). Asthma exacerbation occurred in 1,487 patients: 708 receiving mometasone furoate-formoterol and 779 receiving mometasone furoate. The hazard ratio for the first asthma exacerbation in the mometasone furoate-formoterol versus mometasone furoate group was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.80-0.98; P = .021). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of formoterol to mometasone furoate maintenance therapy did not increase the risk of serious asthma-related events and reduced the risk of asthma exacerbation.

Contextualizing mistreatment in cognitive impairment in Latin America.

Mistreatment is an important social outcome of the growing cognitive impairment epidemic, particularly in developing countries. This study aimed to bring to light what is known about mistreatment in cognitively impaired individuals in Latin American Countries. We identified a gap in the literature on this topic that opens the door for future research.

Neurokinin 1 receptor antagonists in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: focus on fosaprepitant.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) remains a challenge in cancer care. Improved understanding of CINV pathophysiology has triggered the development of new antiemetic therapeutic options, such as selective neurokinin-1 (NK1) receptor antagonists (RAs), which effectively prevent CINV when added to a standard antiemetic regimen (serotonin-3 RA and dexamethasone). Aprepitant and its water-soluble prodrug, fosaprepitant dimeglumine, are the most widely used NK1 RAs, with extensive clinical use worldwide. Recently, a Phase III trial prospectively evaluated fosaprepitant-based antiemetic therapy for CINV prevention in a large, well-defined nonanthracycline- and cyclophosphamide-based moderately emetogenic chemotherapy population. Fosaprepitant demonstrated significantly improved efficacy outcomes compared with a control regimen and was generally well tolerated, indicating that NK1 RAs are a valuable therapeutic option in this setting.

Evaluation of factors contributing to the response to fosaprepitant in a heterogeneous, moderately emetogenic chemotherapy population: an exploratory analysis of a randomized phase III trial.

PURPOSE: Fosaprepitant improved prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in a randomized, double-blind phase III trial (PN031). This post hoc analysis explored factors that may have influenced response. METHODS: Adult subjects (N = 1000) scheduled to receive non-anthracycline and cyclophosphamide (AC) moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) on day 1 were randomly assigned 1:1 to a single-dose, 150-mg intravenous fosaprepitant regimen or a control regimen. Both regimens included dexamethasone and ondansetron on day 1, with ondansetron continuing through day 3 in the control arm only. Complete response (CR; no vomiting and no rescue medication) rates in the acute, delayed, and overall phases (0-25, 25-120, and 0-120 h, respectively) were analyzed by chemotherapy type (carboplatin-based vs non-carboplatin-based), chemotherapy duration (single-day vs multiple-day), and baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Most subjects received single-day chemotherapeutic regimens (70.6%), which were mainly carboplatin-based (67.6%). CR with fosaprepitant was consistent (76-80%) during the delayed and overall phases in carboplatin-based and non-carboplatin-based subgroups and in subgroups receiving single-day or multiple-day MEC regimens. Treatment effects favored fosaprepitant for the carboplatin-based versus the non-carboplatin-based group during the delayed phase (14.1 vs 6.5%; p = 0.06), and for the single-day versus the multiple-day subgroup during the delayed (13.2 vs 3.2%; p = 0.02) and overall phases (12.8 vs 4.0%; p = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory analysis confirms that single-dose fosaprepitant is effective for the prevention of CINV in subjects receiving carboplatin or non-carboplatin in both single- and multiple-day non-AC MEC chemotherapy regimens. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01594749.

Low Occurrence of Colectomy With Long-Term (up to 4 Years) Golimumab Treatment in Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Active Ulcerative Colitis: Data From the PURSUIT Maintenance and Long-Term Extension Studies.

Background: This analysis evaluated the incidence of all-cause colectomies (total or partial) among patients with moderate-to-severe active ulcerative colitis (UC) in the golimumab (GLM) Program of Ulcerative Colitis Utilizing an Investigational Treatment (PURSUIT)-maintenance (-M) and long-term extension (-LTE) studies. Methods: Eligible PURSUIT-M trial participants completed a 6-week GLM induction trial without requiring colectomy. Responders to GLM induction were randomized 1:1:1 to GLM 50 mg, GLM 100 mg, or placebo (PBO) maintenance for up to 1 year, administered every 4 weeks (q4w). Nonresponders to GLM or PBO induction received GLM 100 mg; responders to PBO induction received PBO (each administered q4w for up to 1 year). Participants who completed PURSUIT-M were eligible to continue their treatment in the 3-year PURSUIT-LTE study. Results: A total of 60 (4.9%) colectomies were reported among the 1228 patients who enrolled in the 1-year PURSUIT-M study, which included 672 participants who continued into the 3-year PURSUIT-LTE LTE study (of which 666 were treated). The colectomy rate during the 3-year extension was lower than that observed during the maintenance phase of the study (9/666 [1.4%] compared to 51/1228 [4.2%]). The majority (43/60 [71.7%]) of the reported colectomies occurred in patients who had not responded to induction therapy and who tended to have had more severe disease characteristics at baseline. Conclusions: This retrospective evaluation of colectomy data from the PURSUIT-M and -LTE studies in patients with moderate-to-severe active UC demonstrated a low (<5%) occurrence of colectomy with long-term (up to 4 years) GLM treatment. PURSUIT-M (NCT00488631; EudraCT, 2006-003399-37).

Long-term golimumab persistence: Five-year treatment retention data pooled from pivotal Phase III clinical trials in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis.

INTRODUCTION: Golimumab, a monoclonal antibody against tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), is used widely for treatment of rheumatic diseases. Long-term persistence is an important factor influencing therapeutic benefit and is a surrogate measure of efficacy. We compared five-year golimumab treatment persistence across studies, indications, and lines of therapy using pooled data from pivotal golimumab Phase III clinical trials. METHODS: This post-hoc analysis evaluated use of golimumab administered subcutaneously (50 or 100 mg every four weeks) for up to five years in 2228 adult participants with rheumatoid arthritis (RA; GO-BEFORE, GO-AFTER, and GO-FORWARD studies), psoriatic arthritis (PsA; GO-REVEAL study), or ankylosing spondylitis (AS; GO-RAISE study). Retention rate differences were evaluated by study, indication, and line of therapy using log-rank tests, and probability of treatment persistence was estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: Golimumab retention rates at Year 5 were consistently high when used as 1st-line therapy (69.8%) and did not differ significantly across the three indications tested (p = 0.5106) or across 1st-line studies (p = 0.2327). Retention at Year 5 was better in participants using golimumab as 1st-line than in those using it as 2nd-line (41.6%) therapy. Participants on 2nd-line golimumab therapy had a longer disease duration (median 9.2 years versus 3.7 years) than those on 1st-line golimumab therapy. CONCLUSIONS: These data support the value of long-term golimumab therapy in patients with chronic, immune-mediated rheumatic diseases when used as 1st-line (RA, PsA, AS) or 2nd-line (RA) therapy. Key Points • Golimumab is a human monoclonal antibody directed against tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) and is approved widely for the treatment of rheumatic autoimmune diseases. • We compared the probability of treatment persistence, or the time of continuous drug use, for golimumab across five Phase III studies spanning multiple rheumatic indications over five years. • Treatment persistence was favorable and did not differ significantly for participants with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis, but persistence was greater when golimumab was used as 1st-line than as 2nd-line biologic therapy.

Patient satisfaction with a pressurized metered-dose inhaler with an integrated dose counter containing a fixed-dose mometasone furoate/formoterol combination.

INTRODUCTION: Inhaled delivery devices that are easy to use and facilitate dose tracking may lead to improved patient satisfaction and adherence. Patient satisfaction with a metered-dose inhaler (MDI) with an integrated dose counter containing a fixed-dose mometasone furoate/formoterol combination (MF/F MDI dose counter) was evaluated in subjects with persistent asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. METHODS: In this multicenter study (N = 272, age range: 12-92 years), subject experience and satisfaction with MDI devices was evaluated using baseline and poststudy surveys. Subjects responded to the baseline survey based on their previous MDI experience, then received MF/F MDI 100/10 µg with the integrated dose counter for 4 weeks before completing the poststudy survey. This evaluation was part of a broader study objective to assess performance of the MF/F MDI dose counter. RESULTS: At baseline, 52% of subjects reported being extremely satisfied with their previous MDI. After using the MF/F MDI dose counter, a relative increase of 43% in overall satisfaction was observed. Approximately 90% of subjects agreed the MF/F dose counter helped them track doses and was easy to use; >80% agreed the inhaler was of good quality and well designed. Subjects agreed the dose counter relieved anxiety about running out of medication (68%) or taking a subtherapeutic dose (65%). Nearly 80% of subjects had no reservations about the MF/F MDI dose counter, and most subjects stated they would request it from their physician (66%) and recommend it to a friend (75%). CONCLUSIONS: The MF/F MDI dose counter was found to be easy to use and have overall high patient satisfaction.

Subjective cognitive decline and elder mistreatment in Mexican community-dwelling older adults.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Elder mistreatment in individuals with subjective cognitive decline is an understudied public health problem that violates human rights. DESIGN AND METHODS: Cross-sectional study of 386 Mexican community-dwelling older adults. Individuals with episodic memory, executive function, language, visuospatial skills or attention cognitive complaints without low cognitive performance scores in the Mini-Mental State Examination and the Isaacs Set Test that were considered positive for subjective cognitive decline (SCD). Elder mistreatment (EM) was considered positive if any of the questions on the Geriatric Mistreatment Scale were answered affirmatively. Logistic regression models were created to test the association between SCD and EM. RESULTS: After adjustments made by age, sex, education and depressive symptoms a positive association was found between SCD and EM (OR = 2.226; 95%CI = 1.296 to 3.822 ; p = 0.004). This association was observed in all subtypes of cognitive complaints except excecutive function: episodic memory (OR = 2.219 ; 95%CI = 1.321 to 3.728 ; p = 0.003), language (OR = 2.500 ; 95% CI = 1.422 to 4.396 ; p = 0.001), visuospatial (OR = 2.158 ; 95%CI = 1.162 to 4.007 ; p = 0.015), attention (OR = 2.197 ; 95%CI = 1.206 to 4.001 ; p = 0.010) and executive (OR = 1 2.062 ; 95%CI = 0.981 to 4.333 ; p = 0.056). Discussion and Implications: This study brings to light the relation between SCD and EM in a population where it has been understudied. Exploring mistreatment in older adults who experience subjective cognitive decline might help preserve their safety and create future prevention and intervention strategies.

A phase 3 study evaluating the safety and efficacy of a pediatric dose of mometasone furoate with and without formoterol for persistent asthma.

OBJECTIVES: Asthma affects over 6 million children in the United States alone. This study investigated the efficacy and long-term safety of mometasone furoate-formoterol (MF/F) and MF monotherapy in children with asthma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This phase 3, multicenter, randomized controlled trial evaluated metered-dose inhaler twice daily (BID) dosing with MF/F 100/10 µg or MF 100 µg in children, aged 5 to 11 years, with a history of asthma for greater than or equal to 6 months and confirmed bronchodilator reversibility, who were adequately controlled on inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting beta-agonist combination therapy for greater than or equal to 4 weeks. After a 2-week run-in on MF 100 µg BID, eligible patients received 24 weeks of double-blind treatment and were followed for safety up to 26 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline in AM postdose 60-minute AUC %predicted FEV1% across 12 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: A total of 181 participants received at least one dose of MF/F (n = 91) or MF (n = 90). MF/F was superior to MF across the 12-week evaluation period, with a treatment advantage of 5.21 percentage points (P < .001). Superior onset of action with MF/F over MF was achieved as early as 5 minutes postdose on day 1. Overall, approximately 50% of participants experienced one or more treatment-emergent adverse events, with fewer occurring in the MF/F group. CONCLUSIONS: In children 5 to 11 years of age with persistent asthma, the addition of F to MF was well tolerated and provided significant, rapid, and sustained improvement in lung function compared with MF alone.

Serious Asthma Outcomes and Asthma Exacerbations with Maintenance on Inhaled Corticosteroid (Mometasone Furoate)/Long-Acting Beta Agonist (Formoterol) Combination Compared to Step Down to Mometasone Monotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Because of historical safety concerns with the use of long-acting ß-agonists (LABA) in asthma, step-down from inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/LABA combination therapy to ICS monotherapy is recommended once asthma control is achieved. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the benefit/risk question about whether patients with asthma who achieve disease control on fixed-dose ICS/LABA combination therapy, such as mometasone furoate/formoterol fumarate (MF/F), should continue with this therapy or be stepped down to ICS monotherapy, such as MF. METHODS: Using data from 8447 clinically stable patients with persistent asthma in the Safety Pharma Investigation of Respiratory Outcomes trial who had been receiving a stable dose of ICS/LABA for ≥4 weeks, this post hoc analysis evaluated the risk of serious asthma outcomes (SAOs) (adjudicated hospitalization, intubation, or death) and asthma exacerbation (AEX) (composite of hospitalizations ≥24 hours, emergency visits <24 hours requiring systemic corticosteroid, or systemic corticosteroid for ≥3 consecutive days) in participants randomized to remain on ICS/LABA (MF/F) or step down to ICS (MF) for 26 weeks. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in SAO risk among patients maintained on ICS/LABA with MF/F compared with those who stepped down from ICS/LABA to MF (hazard ratio [HR], 1.03 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.61, 1.75], P = .913). The risk of AEX was significantly lower in patients maintained on ICS/LABA with MF/F compared with those who stepped down from ICS/LABA to MF (HR, 0.87 [95% CI: 0.78, 0.98], P = .020). CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis of a large clinical trial dataset, maintenance on ICS/LABA with MF/F is not associated with an increased risk of SAOs and also significantly reduces the risk of AEX compared with step-down from ICS/LABA to MF.

Dose counter performance of mometasone furoate/formoterol inhalers in subjects with asthma or COPD.

BACKGROUND: Consistent delivery of medication to treat asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is critical for disease control. Dose tracking may eliminate the possibility of sub-therapeutic dosing. This study evaluated the overall performance, including accuracy and ruggedness, of the mometasone furoate/formoterol (MF/F) metered-dose inhaler (MDI) with an integrated numerical dose-counting mechanism in adolescent and adult subjects (aged ≥ 12 y) with persistent asthma or COPD. METHODS: In a phase III, open-label, single-arm, multicenter study, subjects demonstrating at least 90% compliance with MF/F during the screening period received twice daily MF/F MDI 100/10 µg with the integrated dose counter for 4 weeks. Accuracy and ruggedness of the dose counter were assessed by the overall discrepancy rate of subject-recorded actuations versus subject-recorded dose counter readings. Discrepancy rates for Counterstrip™, a manual counting method, were evaluated for reference. Compliance and ergonomic safety were also assessed. RESULTS: The 233 subjects who used ≥ 90% of labeled actuations were included in the primary analysis. Of 26,317 total actuations, 33 dose counter discrepancies occurred (rate = 0.13/100 actuations), of which 13 were due to undercounting. In comparison, the Counterstrip discrepancy rate was 10-fold higher (1.34/100 actuations). Compliance with medication use, Counterstrip use, and e-diary recordings were all high (>98%). No new repetitive strain injuries or exacerbations of preexisting ergonomic injuries of the finger, hand, or arm were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The MF/F MDI dose counter was accurate and rugged in subjects with asthma or COPD. No new repetitive strain injuries or exacerbations of existing ergonomic injuries were associated with inhaler use. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier = NCT00604500.