Browsing
     by title


0-9 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

or enter first few letters:   
OK
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and safety of saxagliptin in combination with metformin compared with sitagliptin in combination with metformin in adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Scheen, André ULg; Charpentier, Guillaume; Ostgren, Carl Johan et al

in Diabetes/Metabolism Research & Reviews (2010), 26(7), 540-9

BACKGROUND: Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors improve glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus when used as monotherapy or in combination with other anti-diabetic drugs (metformin ... [more ▼]

BACKGROUND: Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors improve glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus when used as monotherapy or in combination with other anti-diabetic drugs (metformin, sulphonylurea, or thiazolidinedione). This 18-week, phase 3b, multicentre, double-blind, noninferiority trial compared the efficacy and safety of two dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, saxagliptin and sitagliptin, in patients whose glycaemia was inadequately controlled with metformin. METHODS: Adult type 2 diabetes mellitus patients (N = 801) with glycated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) 6.5-10% on stable metformin doses (1500-3000 mg/day) were randomized 1 : 1 to add-on 5 mg saxagliptin or 100 mg sitagliptin once daily for 18 weeks. The primary efficacy analysis was a comparison of the change from baseline HbA(1c) at week 18 in per-protocol patients. Noninferiority was concluded if the upper limit of the two-sided 95% confidence interval of the HbA(1c) difference between treatments was < 0.3%. RESULTS: The adjusted mean changes in HbA(1c) following the addition of saxagliptin or sitagliptin to stable metformin therapy were - 0.52 and - 0.62%, respectively. The between-group difference was 0.09% (95% confidence interval, - 0.01 to 0.20%), demonstrating noninferiority. Both treatments were generally well tolerated; incidence and types of adverse events were comparable between groups. Hypoglycaemic events, mostly mild, were reported in approximately 3% of patients in each treatment group. Body weight declined by a mean of 0.4 kg in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Saxagliptin added to metformin therapy was effective in improving glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled by metformin alone; saxagliptin plus metformin was noninferior to sitagliptin plus metformin, and was generally well tolerated. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 31 (1 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and safety of strontium ranelate in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis : a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled international trial
Cooper, C; Chapurlat, R; Christiansen, C et al

in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2012), 71(3), 693

Detailed reference viewed: 33 (1 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and safety of strontium ranelate in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: results of a double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial.
Reginster, Jean-Yves ULg; Badurski, J; Bellamy, N et al

in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2013), 72(2), 179-86

BACKGROUND: Strontium ranelate is currently used for osteoporosis. The international, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled Strontium ranelate Efficacy in Knee OsteoarthrItis triAl evaluated its ... [more ▼]

BACKGROUND: Strontium ranelate is currently used for osteoporosis. The international, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled Strontium ranelate Efficacy in Knee OsteoarthrItis triAl evaluated its effect on radiological progression of knee osteoarthritis. METHODS: Patients with knee osteoarthritis (Kellgren and Lawrence grade 2 or 3, and joint space width (JSW) 2.5-5 mm) were randomly allocated to strontium ranelate 1 g/day (n=558), 2 g/day (n=566) or placebo (n=559). The primary endpoint was radiographical change in JSW (medial tibiofemoral compartment) over 3 years versus placebo. Secondary endpoints included radiological progression, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, and knee pain. The trial is registered (ISRCTN41323372). RESULTS: The intention-to-treat population included 1371 patients. Treatment with strontium ranelate was associated with smaller degradations in JSW than placebo (1 g/day: -0.23 (SD 0.56) mm; 2 g/day: -0.27 (SD 0.63) mm; placebo: -0.37 (SD 0.59) mm); treatment-placebo differences were 0.14 (SE 0.04), 95% CI 0.05 to 0.23, p<0.001 for 1 g/day and 0.10 (SE 0.04), 95% CI 0.02 to 0.19, p=0.018 for 2 g/day. Fewer radiological progressors were observed with strontium ranelate (p<0.001 and p=0.012 for 1 and 2 g/day). There were greater reductions in total WOMAC score (p=0.045), pain subscore (p=0.028), physical function subscore (p=0.099) and knee pain (p=0.065) with strontium ranelate 2 g/day. Strontium ranelate was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with strontium ranelate 1 and 2 g/day is associated with a significant effect on structure in patients with knee osteoarthritis, and a beneficial effect on symptoms for strontium ranelate 2 g/day. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 20 (10 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and safety of strontium ranelate in the treatment of knee ostoarthritis : a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled international trial
Reginster, Jean-Yves ULg; Chapurlat, R.; Christiansen, C. et al

in Osteoporosis International (2011), 22(S5), 742-743

Detailed reference viewed: 54 (1 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and safety of tacrolimus compared with ciclosporin A in renal transplantation: three-year observational results
Krämer, Bernhard K.; Del Castillo, Domingo; Margreiter, Raimund et al

in Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation (2008), 23(7), 2386-2392

BACKGROUND: The European tacrolimus versus ciclosporin A microemulsion (CsA-ME) renal transplantation study showed that tacrolimus was significantly more effective in preventing acute rejection and had a ... [more ▼]

BACKGROUND: The European tacrolimus versus ciclosporin A microemulsion (CsA-ME) renal transplantation study showed that tacrolimus was significantly more effective in preventing acute rejection and had a superior cardiovascular risk profile at 6 months. METHODS: The endpoints of this investigator-initiated, observational, 36-month follow-up were acute rejection incidence rates, rates of patient and graft survival and renal function. An additional analysis was performed using the combined endpoints BPAR, graft loss and patient death. Data available from the original ITT population (557 patients; 286 tacrolimus and 271 CsA-ME) were analysed. RESULTS: A total of 231 tacrolimus and 217 CsA-ME patients participated. At 36 months, Kaplan-Meier-estimated BPAR-free survival rates were 78.8% in the tacrolimus group and 60.6% in the CsA-ME group, graft survival rates were 88.0% and 86.9% and patient survival rates were 96.6% and 96.7%, respectively. The estimated combined endpoint-free survival rate was 71.4% with tacrolimus and 55.4% with CsA-ME (P <or= 0.001, chi-square test). Significantly more CsA-ME patients crossed over to tacrolimus during the 3-year follow-up: 21.2% versus 2.6%, P <or= 0.0001, chi-square test. Most patients in the tacrolimus arm discontinued steroids and received monotherapy and fewer tacrolimus patients remained on a triple regimen. Mean serum creatinine concentration was 145.4 +/- 90.9 micromol/L with tacrolimus and 149.0 +/- 92.1 micromol/L with CsA-ME. Significantly more CsA-ME patients had a classified cholesterol value >6 mmol/L (26.3% versus 12.6%, P <or= 0.0003, chi-square test). CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with tacrolimus had significantly higher combined endpoint-free survival rates and lower acute rejection rates with less immunosuppressive medication at 36 months. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 67 (13 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and safety of tacrolimus compared with ciclosporin A microemulsion in renal transplantation: 2 year follow-up results
Krämer, Bernhard K.; Montagnino, Giuseppe; del Castillo, Domingo et al

in Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation (2005), 20

BACKGROUND: Comparison studies of calcineurin inhibitors as cornerstone immunosuppressants in renal transplantation have demonstrated that tacrolimus consistently reduces acute rejection rates and, in ... [more ▼]

BACKGROUND: Comparison studies of calcineurin inhibitors as cornerstone immunosuppressants in renal transplantation have demonstrated that tacrolimus consistently reduces acute rejection rates and, in some studies, also improves long-term renal outcome in comparison to cyclosporin A (CsA). The aim of the present 2 year follow-up of the European Tacrolimus vs Cyclosporin A Microemulsion Renal Transplantation Study was to investigate long-term clinical outcome in terms of rate of acute rejection, graft and patient survival and graft function. METHODS: The European Tacrolimus vs Cyclosporin A Microemulsion Renal Transplantation Study was a randomized, comparative 6 month trial of the calcineurin inhibitors tacrolimus and CsA in combination with both azathioprine and steroids. The intent-to-treat population (ITT) consisted of 286 patients in the tacrolimus arm and 271 in the CsA microemulsion (CsA-ME) arm. Whereas whole blood level targets were 10-20 and 5-15 ng/ml for tacrolimus and 100-400 and 100-200 ng/ml for CsA during months 0-3 and 4-6, respectively, during the investigator-driven follow-up after termination of the main study (months 7-24) no specific calcineurin inhibitor target levels were required. Follow-up data were collected at 2 years post-transplantation from 237 (82.9% of the ITT population) patients who received tacrolimus and 222 (81.9% of the ITT population) patients who received CsA-ME. RESULTS: Calculated on ITT populations, mortality (2.0% vs 3.3%; P<0.05 in Kaplan-Meier analysis) was lower, but rate of graft loss (9.3% vs 11.2%; P = 0.12 in Kaplan-Meier analysis) was not significantly different after 2 years with tacrolimus- vs CsA-ME-based immunosuppression. Biopsy-proven acute rejection was significantly lower (19.6%) with tacrolimus than with CsA-ME (37.3%) during months 0-6 (P<0.0001), but was not significantly different during months 7-12 and 13-24 of follow-up (1.7% and 0.8% with tacrolimus and 4.7% and 0.9% with CsA-ME, respectively). A composite endpoint consisting of graft loss, patient death and biopsy-proven acute rejection occurred significantly more frequently in CsA-ME patients than in tacrolimus patients (42.8% vs 25.9%; P<0.001) during 24 months follow-up. Renal function 2 years post-transplant, measured by serum creatinine concentrations, was significantly better in tacrolimus-based compared with CsA-ME-based immunosuppression (136.9 vs 161.6 micromol/l; P<0.01). Cornerstone immunosuppression remained unchanged in 82.5% and 66.2% of patients treated with tacrolimus and CsA-ME, respectively. At 2 years, more patients in the tacrolimus arm were off steroids and received calcineurin inhibitor monotherapy, and fewer tacrolimus patients remained on a triple immunosuppressive regimen. The cardiovascular risk profile was affected favourably in the tacrolimus arm, with lower cholesterol and triglyceride concentrations (despite less use of cholesterol-lowering drugs); no significant difference in requirement for antidiabetic medication was noted. CONCLUSIONS: The 2 year study results confirm that tacrolimus is a highly efficacious cornerstone immunosuppressant in kidney transplantation. Tacrolimus-based immunosuppression may induce long-term benefits with regard to graft function and graft survival. The overall side-effect profile is considered to be favourable. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 68 (20 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and safety of the fully human anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha monoclonal antibody adalimumab (D2E7) in DMARD refractory patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a 12 week, phase II study
van de Putte, L. B. A.; Rau, R.; Breedveld, F. C. et al

in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2003), 62(12), 1168-1177

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate efficacy, dose response, safety, and tolerability of adalimumab (D2E7) in disease modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) refractory patients with longstanding, active rheumatoid ... [more ▼]

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate efficacy, dose response, safety, and tolerability of adalimumab (D2E7) in disease modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) refractory patients with longstanding, active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: During a 12 week, double blind, placebo controlled study, 284 patients were randomly allocated to receive weekly subcutaneous injections of adalimumab 20 mg (n = 72), 40 mg (n = 70), or 80 mg (n = 72) or placebo (n = 70) without concomitant DMARDs. RESULTS: Adalimumab significantly improved the signs and symptoms of RA for all efficacy measures. ACR20 responses with adalimumab were significant at each assessment versus placebo (p</=0.01). Additionally, ACR responses with adalimumab were achieved more rapidly than with placebo, with 82/115 (71%) of the ultimate ACR20 response rate to adalimumab treatment achieved at week 2. At week 12, for adalimumab 20, 40, and 80 mg, ACR20 response rates were 50.7%, 57.1%, and 54.2%, respectively, versus 10.0% for placebo (p</=0.001 for all comparisons); ACR50 rates were 23.9%, 27.1%, and 19.4%, respectively, versus 1.4% for placebo (p</=0.001 for all comparisons); and ACR70 rates were 11.3%, 10.0%, and 8.3%, respectively, versus 0.0% for placebo (p</=0.05 for all comparisons). All adalimumab doses significantly improved all ACR core criteria at all assessments. The 40 mg and 80 mg doses provided similar benefit. Adalimumab at all doses was generally well tolerated, with only mild or moderate adverse events. Completion rates were 87% for adalimumab and 67% for placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab given as monotreatment to patients with longstanding, severe RA refractory to traditional DMARDs produced a rapid, sustained response and was safe and well tolerated, with no dose limiting side effects. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 6 (0 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and safety of the weight-loss drug rimonabant.
Despres, Jean-Pierre; Van Gaal, Luc; Pi-Sunyer, Xavier et al

in Lancet (2008), 371(9612), 555556-7

Detailed reference viewed: 29 (4 ULg)
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and tolerability of a monophasic oral contraceptive containing ethinylestradiol and drospirenone.
Huber, J.; Foidart, Jean-Michel ULg; Wuttke, W. et al

in European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health Care (2000), 5(1), 25-34

To assess the contraceptive reliability, cycle control and tolerability of a new monophasic oral contraceptive containing 30 g ethinylestradiol plus 3 mg drospirenone (Yasmin, Schering AG, Berlin, Germany ... [more ▼]

To assess the contraceptive reliability, cycle control and tolerability of a new monophasic oral contraceptive containing 30 g ethinylestradiol plus 3 mg drospirenone (Yasmin, Schering AG, Berlin, Germany), it was compared with an established oral contraceptive containing 30 g ethinylestradiol plus 150 g desogestrel (Marvelon, NV Organon, Oss, The Netherlands). METHODS: A randomized, open-label, 13-cycle study was performed at 80 European centers. Contraceptive reliability, cycle control, blood pressure, body weight, the incidence of adverse events and skin condition were assessed during 13 cycles of oral contraceptive use, and at follow-up. Subjects recorded body weight on three consecutive days pretreatment and weekly thereafter. RESULTS: Of 2069 women who started the study and received the trial preparations in a ratio of 4:1 (ethinylestradiol/drospirenone, n = 1657; ethinylestradiol/desogestrel, n = 412), 1615 completed the 13 cycles plus follow-up, providing data for over 23,000 evaluable cycles. Eleven pregnancies occurred during treatment, only one of which (in the ethinylestradiol/drospirenone group) could not be ascribed to user failure or interaction with other factors. Both preparations provided effective contraception and cycle control. Pre-existing acne and seborrhea were improved and blood pressure was essentially unchanged. The two treatments differed in their effect on body weight, the difference being statistically significant. In the ethinylestradiol/drospirenone group, there was a distinct decrease over the whole treatment phase, while a subtle and less distinct decrease was documented in the ethinylestradiol/desogestrel group. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of 30 g ethinylestradiol/3 mg drospirenone provides effective oral contraception, excellent cycle control, good tolerability and a level of weight loss that may have a significant beneficial effect on compliance in women with a tendency to weight gain due to water retention. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 20 (1 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and Tolerability of a New Formulation of Oral Tiludronate (Tablet) in the Treatment of Paget's Disease of Bone
Reginster, Jean-Yves ULg; Treves, R.; Renier, J. C. et al

in Journal of Bone and Mineral Research : The Official Journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (1994), 9(5), 615-9

We sought to assess efficacy and safety of a new oral formulation (tablet) of tiludronate in Paget's disease of bone. We studied 128 patients with Paget's disease in an open-label uncontrolled trial ... [more ▼]

We sought to assess efficacy and safety of a new oral formulation (tablet) of tiludronate in Paget's disease of bone. We studied 128 patients with Paget's disease in an open-label uncontrolled trial. Patients received a daily dose of 400 mg oral tiludronate (two tablets). Treatment was for 6 months. Serum alkaline phosphatase activity (SAP) and fasting urinary excretion of hydroxyproline/creatine (OH/Cr) were measured every 3 months, as were biochemical parameters reflecting renal, hepatic, and hematologic functions. Analgesic efficacy was self-evaluated from a visual analog scale (VAS). Statistical analysis revealed a significant reduction from baseline in SAP and OH/Cr levels, as well as VAS scores. In the whole population with evaluation under treatment, there was a reduction in initial SAP activity after 3 months (47.2 +/- 2.2%, mean +/- SEM) and 6 months (58.3 +/- 2.3%). In the population with SAP levels above twice the upper limit at inclusion and with evaluation at month 3 and month 6 (n = 96), the reduction in SAP levels was 49.3 +/- 2.4% after 3 months and of 59.5 +/- 2.6% after 6 months (ANOVA time effect, p = 0.0001). Aside from mild gastrointestinal disturbances, as experienced with other oral bisphosphonates, clinical tolerance was good. Exhaustive biochemical investigation failed to reveal significant toxicity of tiludronate tablets at the dose of 400 mg/day. The dose of 400 mg daily of this new formulation appears to be a satisfactory tiludronate regimen for the treatment of Paget's disease of bone. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 4 (1 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and Tolerability of Calcitonin in the Prevention and Treatment of Osteoporosis
Halkin, V; Reginster, Jean-Yves ULg

in BioDrugs : Clinical Immunotherapeutics, Biopharmaceuticals & Gene Therapy (1998), 10(4), 295-300

Calcitonin in general, and, more specifically, salmon calcitonin (salcatonin), has been known for 30 years to be a specific inhibitor of bone resorption. Studies have confirmed its efficacy in metabolic ... [more ▼]

Calcitonin in general, and, more specifically, salmon calcitonin (salcatonin), has been known for 30 years to be a specific inhibitor of bone resorption. Studies have confirmed its efficacy in metabolic bone diseases characterised by excessive bone resorption, such as osteoporosis. Most randomised studies in which salcatonin and oral calcium were administered for 1 to 5 years to recently postmenopausal women for the prevention of osteoporosis have shown that bone mineral density or bone content of the lumbar spine increased significantly, compared with a reduction among women receiving calcium only. Prospective studies have shown that salcatonin is effective in the treatment of established osteoporosis, reducing significantly the relative risk of new vertebral fractures. The benefits of salcatonin nasal spray therapy were observed in the majority of women studied, and it has been shown to be an effective alternative for osteoporotic women more than 5 years postmenopausal who refuse estrogens, or for whom estrogens are contraindicated. Finally, in established osteoporosis, nasal calcitonin possesses a potent analgesic effect. The well-demonstrated effects of nasal calcitonin permit it to be considered a well tolerated and efficient approach for prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 8 (4 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and tolerability of intravenous ibandronate injections in postmenopausal osteoporosis: 2-year results from the DIVA study.
Eisman, John A; Civitelli, Roberto; Adami, Silvano et al

in Journal of Rheumatology (2008), 35(3), 488-97

OBJECTIVE: An effective and well tolerated intravenous (IV) bisphosphonate could provide a new treatment method for patients with osteoporosis. The Dosing IntraVenous Administration (DIVA) study was ... [more ▼]

OBJECTIVE: An effective and well tolerated intravenous (IV) bisphosphonate could provide a new treatment method for patients with osteoporosis. The Dosing IntraVenous Administration (DIVA) study was designed to identify the optimal ibandronate IV injection schedule for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis by comparing the efficacy and tolerability of 2- and 3-monthly injections with the previously evaluated daily oral ibandronate regimen. We report the effects on lumbar spine and proximal femur bone mineral density (BMD) and bone resorption markers over 2 years. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, noninferiority study recruited 1395 women (aged 55-80 yrs; > or = 5 yrs since menopause) with osteoporosis [mean lumbar spine (L2-L4) BMD T-score < -2.5 and > or = -5.0]. Patients received IV ibandronate (2 mg every 2 mo or 3 mg every 3 mo) plus daily oral placebo, or 2.5 mg daily oral ibandronate plus 2- or 3-monthly IV placebo. Supplemental vitamin D (400 IU) and calcium (500 mg) were provided throughout the 2-year study. RESULTS: At 2 years, the 2- and 3-monthly IV regimens achieved statistically noninferior and also superior increases in lumbar spine BMD compared with the daily regimen (6.4% and 6.3% vs 4.8%, respectively; p < 0.001). Greater increases were also obtained with IV ibandronate versus daily in proximal femur BMD. Serum concentrations of the biochemical marker of bone resorption C-telopeptide of the alpha-chain of type I collagen were reduced to a similar extent in all treatment arms (53.4%-59.9%). The tolerability profile of the IV regimens was similar to that observed with daily oral therapy. CONCLUSION: Ibandronate IV injections are an effective and well tolerated treatment for postmenopausal osteoporosis and provide a useful alternative to oral dosing. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 14 (4 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and tolerability of lasmiditan, an oral 5-HT(1F) receptor agonist, for the acute treatment of migraine: a phase 2 randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, dose-ranging study.
Farkkila, Markus; Diener, Hans-Christoph; Geraud, Gilles et al

in Lancet Neurology (2012), 11(5), 405-13

BACKGROUND: Lasmiditan (COL-144) is a novel, centrally acting, highly selective 5-HT(1F) receptor agonist without vasoconstrictor activity that seemed effective when given as an intravenous infusion in a ... [more ▼]

BACKGROUND: Lasmiditan (COL-144) is a novel, centrally acting, highly selective 5-HT(1F) receptor agonist without vasoconstrictor activity that seemed effective when given as an intravenous infusion in a proof-of-concept migraine study. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of oral lasmiditan for the acute treatment of migraine. METHODS: In this multicentre, double-blind, parallel-group, dose-ranging study in 43 headache centres in five European countries, patients with migraine with and without aura and who were not using prophylaxis were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1:1) to treat one moderate or severe attack at home with 50 mg, 100 mg, 200 mg, or 400 mg lasmiditan, or placebo. Study drug and placebo were supplied in identical numbered tablet packs. The randomisation code was generated by an independent statistician. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was dose response for headache relief (moderate or severe becoming mild or none) at 2 h. The primary analysis was done in the modified intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00883051. FINDINGS: Between July 8 2009, and Feb 18, 2010, 512 patients were randomly assigned to treatment, 391 of whom received treatment. 86 patients received placebo (81 included in primary analysis) and 305 received lasmiditan (50 mg n=79, 100 mg n=81, 200 mg n=69, and 400 mg n=68 included in primary analysis). There was a linear association between headache response rate at 2 h and lasmiditan dose (Cochran-Armitage test p<0.0001). Every lasmiditan treatment dose significantly improved headache response at 2 h compared with placebo (lasmiditan 50 mg: difference 17.9%, 95% CI 3.9-32.1, p=0.022; 100 mg: 38.2%, 24.1-52.4, p<0.0001; 200 mg: 28.8%, 9.6-39.9, p=0.0018; 400 mg: 38.7%, 23.9-53.6, p<0.0001). The proportion of patients with treatment-emergent adverse events increased with increasing doses (53/82 [65%], 59/82 [72%], 61/71 [86%], and 59/70 [84%] for lasmiditan 50, 100, 200, and 400 mg, respectively vs 19/86 [22%] for placebo). Most adverse events were mild or moderate in intensity, with 16 of 82 (20%), 23 of 82 (28%), 28 of 71 (39%), and 31 of 70 (44%) of patients on lasmiditan 50, 100, 200, and 400 mg, respectively reporting a severe adverse event compared with five of 86 (6%) on placebo. The most common adverse events were CNS related and included dizziness, fatigue, vertigo, paraesthesia, and somnolence. INTERPRETATION: Oral lasmiditan seems to be safe and effective in the acute treatment of migraine. Further assessment in larger placebo-controlled and triptan-controlled trials are needed to assess the potential role of lasmiditan in acute migraine therapy. FUNDING: CoLucid Pharmaceuticals. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 21 (0 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and tolerability of olmesartan medoxomil in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension - The OLMEBEST Study
Barrios, Vivencio; Boccanelli, Allesandro; Ewald, Silke et al

in Clinical Drug Investigation (2007), 27(8), 545-558

Background and objective: Achieving target BP is important to control the increased cardiovascular risk associated with uncontrolled hypertension. However, failure to respond to therapy is common with all ... [more ▼]

Background and objective: Achieving target BP is important to control the increased cardiovascular risk associated with uncontrolled hypertension. However, failure to respond to therapy is common with all classes of antihypertensive agents. Angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists (angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs]) possess many of the positive features of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, with fewer adverse effects. However, many patients fail to respond adequately to low-dose monotherapy. This study examined whether olmesartan medoxomil dose titration and olmesartan medoxomil/hydrochlorothiazide combination therapy were therapeutically equivalent in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension who had shown an inadequate response to low-dose olmesartan medoxomil monotherapy. Methods: This was a prospective, parallel group, partially randomised, doubleblind study set in 463 centres in nine European countries. 2306 male and female adult patients aged 18–75 years with mild to moderate essential hypertension (sitting diastolic BP [DBP] ≥90mm Hg and <110mm Hg) were enrolled. All enrolled patients received open-label olmesartan medoxomil 20mg once daily for 8 weeks. At the end of this period, patients whose BP had not normalised (sitting DBP ≥90mm Hg) were randomised to receive olmesartan medoxomil monotherapy (40mg once daily, n = 302) or olmesartan medoxomil (20mg once daily)/ hydrochlorothiazide (12.5mg once daily) combination therapy (n = 325) for 4 weeks. The main outcome measure was change in mean sitting DBP during randomised treatment. Results: After 8 weeks of open-label treatment with olmesartan medoxomil 20 mg/day, 76% of patients showed a DBP response (sitting DBP <90mm Hg or reduction of ≥10mm Hg). During the randomised phase of the study, both treatments were associated with further improvements in sitting SBP/DBP: a reduction of 5.3/5.1mm Hg with olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/day, and a reduction of 10.8/7.9mm Hg with olmesartan medoxomil/hydrochlorothiazide combination therapy. Final mean BPs of 145.3/90.9mm Hg (olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/day) and 140.7/88.7mm Hg (olmesartan medoxomil 20mg + hydrochlorothiazide) were achieved, compared with a mean BP of 160.8/100.5mm Hg at baseline. The two treatments were not therapeutically equivalent. Sitting DBP showed a response and was normalised (<90mm Hg) in 62% and 47% of olmesartan medoxomil monotherapy patients, respectively. In the combination therapy group, these endpoints were achieved by 71% (response) and 59% (normalisation) of patients. Treatment with olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/day was associated with a lower frequency of adverse events than olmesartan medoxomil/ hydrochlorothiazide combination therapy (21.5% vs 28.3%, respectively). Conclusion: For patients who did not achieve adequate BP control after initial treatment with olmesartan medoxomil 20 mg/day, olmesartan medoxomil dose titration (to 40 mg/day) or addition of hydrochlorothiazide (12.5 mg/day) elicited a sitting DBP response in the majority of patients who had failed to respond to low-dose monotherapy, and normalisation of sitting DBP in approximately 50% of patients. Both these strategies represent effective and well tolerated treatment options in patients who show an inadequate response to low-dose monotherapy with olmesartan medoxomil. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 42 (2 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and tolerability of olmesartan medoxomil in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension - The OLMEBEST study
Barrios, V.; Boccanelli, A.; Ewald, S. et al

in Current Medical Research & Opinion (2006), 22(7), 1375-1380

Background and objective: Achieving target BP is important to control the increased cardiovascular risk associated with uncontrolled hypertension. However, failure to respond to therapy is common with all ... [more ▼]

Background and objective: Achieving target BP is important to control the increased cardiovascular risk associated with uncontrolled hypertension. However, failure to respond to therapy is common with all classes of antihypertensive agents. Angiotensin H type I receptor antagonists (angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs]) possess many of the positive features of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, with fewer adverse effects. However, many patients fail to respond adequately to low-dose monotherapy. This study examined whether olmesartan medoxomil dose titration and olmesartan medoxomil/hydrochlorothiazide combination therapy were therapeutically equivalent in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension who had shown an inadequate response to low-dose olmesartan medoxomil monotherapy. Methods: This was a prospective, parallel group, partially randomised, double-blind study set in 463 centres in nine European countries. 2306 male and female adult patients aged 18-75 years with mild to moderate essential hypertension (sitting diastolic BP [DBP] >= 90mm Hg and < 110mm Hg) were enrolled. All enrolled patients received open-label olmesartan medoxomil 20mg once daily for 8 weeks. At the end of this period, patients whose BP had not normalised (sitting DBP >= 90mm Hg) were randomised to receive olmesartan medoxomil monotherapy (40mg once daily, n = 302) or olmesartan medoxomil (20mg once daily)/ hydrochlorothiazide (12.5mg once daily) combination therapy (n = 325) for 4 weeks. The main outcome measure was change in mean sitting DBP during randomised treatment. Results: After 8 weeks of open-label treatment with olmesartan medoxomil 20 mg/day, 76% of patients showed a DBP response (sitting DBP < 90mm Hg or reduction of >= 10mm Hg). During the randomised phase of the study, both treatments were associated with further improvements in sitting SBP/DBP: a reduction of 5.3/5. 1 mm Hg with olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/day, and a reduction of 10.8/7.9mm Hg with olmesartan medoxomil/thydrochlorothiazide combination therapy. Final mean BPs of 145.3/90.9mm Hg (olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/day) and 140.7/88.7mm Hg (olmesartan medoxomil 20mg + hydrochlorothiazide) were achieved, compared with a mean BP of 160.8/ 100.5mm Hg at baseline. The two treatments were not therapeutically equivalent. Sitting DBP showed a response and was normalised (< 90mm Hg) in 62% and 47% of olmesartan medoxomil monotherapy patients, respectively. In the combination therapy group, these endpoints were achieved by 71 % (response) and 59% (normalisation) of patients. Treatment with olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/day was associated with a lower frequency of adverse events than olmesartan medoxomil/hydrochlorothiazide combination therapy (21.5% vs 28.3%, respectively). Conclusion: For patients who did not achieve adequate BP control after initial treatment with olmesartan medoxomil 20 mg/day, olmesartan medoxomil dose titration (to 40 mg/day) or addition of hydrochlorothiazide (12.5 mg/day) elicited a sitting DBP response in the majority of patients who had failed to respond to low-dose monotherapy, and normalisation of sitting DBP in approximately 50% of patients. Both these strategies represent effective and well tolerated treatment options in patients who show an inadequate response to low-dose monotherapy with olmesartan medoxomil. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 28 (7 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and tolerability of once-monthly oral ibandronate in postmenopausal osteoporosis: 2 year results from the MOBILE study
Reginster, Jean-Yves ULg; Adami, S.; Lakatos, P. et al

in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2006), 65(5), 654-661

BACKGROUND: Reducing bisphosphonate dosing frequency may improve suboptimal adherence to treatment and therefore therapeutic outcomes in postmenopausal osteoporosis. Once-monthly oral ibandronate has been ... [more ▼]

BACKGROUND: Reducing bisphosphonate dosing frequency may improve suboptimal adherence to treatment and therefore therapeutic outcomes in postmenopausal osteoporosis. Once-monthly oral ibandronate has been developed to overcome this problem. OBJECTIVE: To confirm the 1 year results and provide more extensive safety and tolerability information for once-monthly dosing by a 2 year analysis. METHODS: MOBILE, a randomised, phase III, non-inferiority study, compared the efficacy and safety of once-monthly ibandronate with daily ibandronate, which has previously been shown to reduce vertebral fracture risk in comparison with placebo. RESULTS: 1609 postmenopausal women were randomised. Substantial increases in lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) were seen in all treatment arms: 5.0%, 5.3%, 5.6%, and 6.6% in the daily and once-monthly groups (50 + 50 mg, 100 mg, and 150 mg), respectively. It was confirmed that all once-monthly regimens were at least as effective as daily treatment, and in addition, 150 mg was found to be better (p<0.001). Substantial increases in proximal femur (total hip, femoral neck, trochanter) BMD were seen; 150 mg produced the most pronounced effect (p<0.05 versus daily treatment). Independent of the regimen, most participants (70.5-93.5%) achieved increases above baseline in lumbar spine or total hip BMD, or both. Pronounced decreases in the biochemical marker of bone resorption, sCTX, observed in all arms after 3 months, were maintained throughout. The 150 mg regimen consistently produced greater increases in BMD and sCTX suppression than the 100 mg and daily regimens. Ibandronate was well tolerated, with a similar incidence of adverse events across groups. CONCLUSIONS: Once-monthly oral ibandronate is at least as effective and well tolerated as daily treatment. Once-monthly administration may be more convenient for patients and improve therapeutic adherence, thereby optimising outcomes. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 20 (4 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and tolerability of once-monthly oral ibandronate in postmenopausal osteoporosis: 2 Year results from the MOBILE study (Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2006) 65, (654-661))
REGINSTER, Jean-Yves ULg; Adami, S.; Lakatos, P. et al

in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2008), 67(2), 280

[No abstract available]

Detailed reference viewed: 15 (3 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and tolerability of rimonabant in overweight or obese patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomised controlled study.
Scheen, André ULg; Finer, Nick; Hollander, Priscilla et al

in Lancet (2006), 368(9548), 1660-72

BACKGROUND: Rimonabant, a selective cannabinoid type 1 receptor blocker, reduces bodyweight and improves cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors in non-diabetic overweight or obese patients. The aim of ... [more ▼]

BACKGROUND: Rimonabant, a selective cannabinoid type 1 receptor blocker, reduces bodyweight and improves cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors in non-diabetic overweight or obese patients. The aim of the RIO-Diabetes trial was to assess the efficacy and safety of rimonabant in overweight or obese patients with type 2 diabetes that was inadequately controlled by metformin or sulphonylureas. METHODS: 1047 overweight or obese type 2 diabetes patients (body-mass index 27-40 kg/m2) with a haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) concentration of 6.5-10.0% (mean 7.3% [SD 0.9] at baseline) already on metformin or sulphonylurea monotherapy were given a mild hypocaloric diet and advice for increased physical activity, and randomly assigned placebo (n=348), 5 mg/day rimonabant (360) or 20 mg/day rimonabant (339) for 1 year. Two individuals in the 5 mg/day group did not receive double-blind treatment and were thus not included in the final analysis. The primary endpoint was weight change from baseline after 1 year of treatment. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00029848. FINDINGS: 692 patients completed the 1 year follow-up; numbers in each group after 1 year were much the same. Weight loss was significantly greater after 1 year in both rimonabant groups than in the placebo group (placebo: -1.4 kg [SD 3.6]; 5 mg/day: -2.3 kg [4.2], p=0.01 vs placebo; 20 mg/day: -5.3 kg [5.2], p<0.0001 vs placebo). Rimonabant was generally well tolerated. The incidence of adverse events that led to discontinuation was slightly greater in the 20 mg/day rimonabant group, mainly due to depressed mood disorders, nausea, and dizziness. INTERPRETATION: These data indicate that 20 mg/day rimonabant, in combination with diet and exercise, can produce a clinically meaningful reduction in bodyweight and improve HbA1c and a number of cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors in overweight or obese patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by metformin or sulphonylureas. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 167 (3 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and tolerability of sumatriptan tablets in a fast-disintegrating, rapid-release formulation for the acute treatment of migraine: Results of a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled study
Carpay, J.; Schoenen, Jean ULg; Ahmad, F. et al

in Clinical Therapeutics (2004), 26(2), 214-223

Background: Sumatriptan tablets have been developed in a fast-disintegrating, rapid-release formulation designed to facilitate tablet disintegration and drug dispersion and to potentially mitigate the ... [more ▼]

Background: Sumatriptan tablets have been developed in a fast-disintegrating, rapid-release formulation designed to facilitate tablet disintegration and drug dispersion and to potentially mitigate the effects of gastric stasis that can accompany migraine. Objective: This study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of sumatriptan 50- and 100-mg tablets in a fast-disintegrating, rapid-release formulation compared with those of placebo in patients with migraine. Methods: This clinical trial had a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group design. Exclusion criteria included >6 migraines monthly during either of the 2 months before screenings uncontrolled hypertension; suspected or confirmed cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease, and ophthalmic, basilar, or hemiplegic migraine. Sumatriptan 50 and 100 mg and placebo were taken on an outpatient basis during the mild-pain phase of a single migraine attack. Patients recorded details of the treated migraine on a diary card and rated pain severity immediately before dosing and 30 minutes, 45 minutes, I hour, and 2 hours after dosing using a 4-point scale (from 0 = none to 3 = severe). The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of patients who were pain free 2 hours after dosing. Additional efficacy end points were the proportion of patients who were pain free at 30 minutes, 45 minutes, and 1 hour after dosing, the proportion who were migraine free through 2 hours after dosing; and the proportion with a sustained pain-free response. Results: Patients' mean age ranged from 39.7 to 41.5 years across the 3 groups, and the majority were women (79.7%-85.9%) and white (98.7%-100%). One hundred thirty-seven patients received sumatriptan 50 mg, 142 sumatriptan 100 mg, and 153 placebo. In the intent-to-treat population (n = 432), 51.1% of patients who received sumatriptan 50 mg and 66.2% of patients who received sumatriptan 100 mg were pain free 2 hours after dosing, compared with 19.6% of the placebo group (P < 0.001, each sumatriptan dose vs placebo). In an exploratory analysis, the 2-hour pain-free rate with sumatriptan 100 mg was significantly better than that with sumatriptan 50 mg (P = 0.007). Significantly more patients who received sumatriptan 100 mg were pain free compared with placebo at 30 minutes (P < 0.01), 45 minutes (P < 0.001), and 1 hour after dosing (P < 0.001); similar pain-free results were observed in patients who received sumatriptan 50 mg at 45 minutes (P < 0.05) and 1 hour (P < 0.01). In the per-protocol population (n = 313), pain-free efficacy 2 hours after dosing was 52.7% with sumatriptan 50 mg and 74.8% with sumatriptan 100 mg, compared with 21.0% with placebo (P < 0.001, each sumatriptan dose VS placebo). These rates were greater than those in the overall study population, ∼12.0% of whom treated moderate or severe pain. The only drug-related adverse events reported in ≥3% of patients in any treatment group were nausea and vomiting (<1%, 5%, and 2% in the sumatriptan 50 and 100 mg and placebo groups, respectively), chest symptoms (2 %, 3 %, and 0%), and malaise and fatigue (1%, 3 %, and < 1%). No serious adverse events were reported. Conclusions: In this study, sumatriptan tablets in a fast-disintegrating, rapid-release oral formulation provided pain-free efficacy in the acute treatment of migraine. Efficacy was maximized with the 100-mg dose compared with the 50-mg dose, and by treating early when pain was mild. In the intent-to-treat population, 51.1% of patients who received sumatriptan 50 mg and 66.2% of those who received sumatriptan 100 mg were pain free 2 hours after dosing. In the per-protocol population, 3 of 4 patients taking the 100-mg tablets for mild pain within 1 hour of its onset were pain free at 2 hours. Sumatriptan tablets were generally well tolerated. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 31 (0 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and tolerance of a new formulation of oral tiludronate (tablet) in the treatment of Paget's disease of bone
Reginster, Jean-Yves ULg; Treves, R; Renier, JC et al

in Calcified Tissue International (1993), 52(S1), 66

Detailed reference viewed: 13 (1 ULg)