Efficacy and safety of Jentadueto(R) (linagliptin plus metformin).
in Expert Opinion on Drug Safety (2013), 12(2), 275-89
INTRODUCTION: Metformin is the first-choice drug in the management of type 2 diabetes. However, most patients require a combined therapy to reach and/or maintain targets of glucose control. Dipeptidyl ... [more ▼]
INTRODUCTION: Metformin is the first-choice drug in the management of type 2 diabetes. However, most patients require a combined therapy to reach and/or maintain targets of glucose control. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors offer new options for combined therapy with metformin. Linagliptin shares a similar pharmacodynamic (PD) profile with other gliptins, but has a unique pharmacokinetic (PK) profile characterized by negligible renal excretion. AREAS COVERED: An extensive literature search was performed to analyze the potential PK/PD interactions between linagliptin and metformin. They are not prone to PK drug-drug interactions. The two compounds may be administered together, either separately or using a fixed-dose combination (FDC) as shown by bioequivalence studies. The addition of linagliptin in patients not well controlled with metformin alone has proven its efficacy in improving glucose levels with a good safety profile. Initial co-administration of linagliptin plus metformin improves glucose control more potently than either compound separately, without hypoglycemia, weight gain or increased metformin-related gastrointestinal side effects. EXPERT OPINION: The linagliptin plus metformin combination may offer some advantages over the classical sulfonylurea-metformin combination. Even if linagliptin is safe in patients with renal impairment, the use of metformin (and thus of the linagliptin plus metformin FDC) is still controversial in this population. [less ▲]Detailed reference viewed: 32 (0 ULg)
Efficacy and safety of maribavir dosed at 100 mg orally twice daily for the prevention of cytomegalovirus disease in liver transplant recipients: a randomized, double-blind, multicenter controlled trial.
; ; et al
in American Journal of Transplantation (2012), 12(11), 3021-30
Maribavir is an oral benzimidazole riboside with potent in vitro activity against cytomegalovirus (CMV), including some CMV strains resistant to ganciclovir. In a randomized, double-blind, multicenter ... [more ▼]
Maribavir is an oral benzimidazole riboside with potent in vitro activity against cytomegalovirus (CMV), including some CMV strains resistant to ganciclovir. In a randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial, the efficacy and safety of prophylactic oral maribavir (100 mg twice daily) for prevention of CMV disease were compared with oral ganciclovir (1000 mg three times daily) in 303 CMV-seronegative liver transplant recipients with CMV-seropositive donors (147 maribavir; 156 ganciclovir). Patients received study drug for up to 14 weeks and were monitored for CMV infection by blood surveillance tests and also for the development of CMV disease. The primary endpoint was Endpoint Committee (EC)-confirmed CMV disease within 6 months of transplantation. In a modified intent-to-treat analysis, the noninferiority of maribavir compared to oral ganciclovir for prevention of CMV disease was not established (12% with maribavir vs. 8% with ganciclovir: event rate difference of 0.041; 95% CI: -0.038, 0.119). Furthermore, significantly fewer ganciclovir patients had EC-confirmed CMV disease or CMV infection by pp65 antigenemia or CMV DNA PCR compared to maribavir patients at both 100 days (20% vs. 60%; p < 0.0001) and at 6 months (53% vs. 72%; p = 0.0053) after transplantation. Graft rejection, patient survival, and non-CMV infections were similar for maribavir and ganciclovir patients. Maribavir was well-tolerated and associated with fewer hematological adverse events than oral ganciclovir. At a dose of 100 mg twice daily, maribavir is safe but not adequate for prevention of CMV disease in liver transplant recipients at high risk for CMV disease. [less ▲]Detailed reference viewed: 85 (0 ULg)
Efficacy and safety of monofluorophosphate and calcium in postmenopausal osteoporosis
Reginster, Jean-Yves ; Zegels, Brigitte ; et al
in Revista Espanola de Reumatologia : Organo Oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Reumatologia (1993), 20(S1), 186Detailed reference viewed: 8 (1 ULg)
Efficacy and safety of oral strontium ranelate for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: rationale and design of randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
; REGINSTER, Jean-Yves ; et al
in Current Medical Research & Opinion (2012), 28(2), 231-9
Abstract Objective: The osteoporosis drug strontium ranelate dissociates bone remodelling processes. It also inhibits subchondral bone resorption and stimulates cartilage matrix formation in vitro ... [more ▼]
Abstract Objective: The osteoporosis drug strontium ranelate dissociates bone remodelling processes. It also inhibits subchondral bone resorption and stimulates cartilage matrix formation in vitro. Exploratory studies in the osteoporosis trials report that strontium ranelate reduces biomarkers of cartilage degradation, and attenuates the progression and clinical symptoms of spinal osteoarthritis, suggesting symptom- and structure-modifying activity in osteoarthritis. We describe the rationale and design of a randomised trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of strontium ranelate in knee osteoarthritis. Research design, methods, and results: This double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (98 centres, 18 countries) includes ambulatory Caucasian men and women aged >/=50 years with primary knee osteoarthritis of the medial tibiofemoral compartment (Kellgren and Lawrence grade 2 or 3), joint space width (JSW) 2.5 to 5 mm, and knee pain on most days in the previous month (intensity >/=40 mm on a visual analogue scale). Patients are randomly allocated to three groups (strontium ranelate 1 or 2 g/day, or placebo). Follow-up is expected to last 3 years. The primary endpoint is radiographic change in JSW from baseline in each group versus placebo. The main clinical secondary endpoint is WOMAC score at the knee. Safety is assessed at every visit. It is estimated that 1600 patients are required to establish statistical significance with power >90% (0.2 mm +/- 10% between-group difference in change in JSW over 3 years). Recruitment started in April 2006. The results are expected in spring 2012. Clinical trial registration: The trial is registered on www.controlled-trials.com (number ISRCTN41323372). Conclusions: This randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled study will establish the potential of strontium ranelate in improving structure and symptoms in patients with knee osteoarthritis. [less ▲]Detailed reference viewed: 150 (13 ULg)
Efficacy and safety of piroxicam revisited. A global meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials.
; ; et al
in Pharmacological Research (2009), 60
BACKGROUND: The relative efficacy/safety profiles of traditional (non-selective) NSAIDs (t-NSAIDs) have been repeatedly challenged. To better understand the efficacy and safety profile of piroxicam, a ... [more ▼]
BACKGROUND: The relative efficacy/safety profiles of traditional (non-selective) NSAIDs (t-NSAIDs) have been repeatedly challenged. To better understand the efficacy and safety profile of piroxicam, a widely used NSAID, a meta-analysis of comparative RCTs was carried out according to the QUOROM guidance. METHODS: A systematic comprehensive research (years 1980-2006) of any comparative randomised controlled trial (of over 7-day duration) with piroxicam for the treatment of osteoarticular conditions was conducted. Conservative analyses were stratified by comparator, outcome, indication, duration, and doses. Publication bias and robustness were exhaustively investigated. RESULTS: Seventy-five comparative trials were ultimately included for analyses. Regarding global efficacy, piroxicam was more effective than naproxen [OR=1.37 (1.05; 1.77)] and nabumetone [OR=1.72 (1.26; 2.34)], while equivalent to other NSAIDS [OR=1.06 (0.96; 1.18)]. For pain and articular swelling, piroxicam was statistically equivalent to all other NSAIDs. For mobility, piroxicam appeared to be more effective than indomethacin, while equivalent to all other NSAIDs. Piroxicam was globally safer than other NSAIDs OR=0.84 [0.73; 0.96], notably indomethacin [OR=0.53 (0.43; 0.64], naproxen [OR=0.75 (0.65; 0.85)] and salicylates [OR=0.36 (0.17; 0.75)]. From a global GI safety point of view, piroxicam was better tolerated than indomethacin [OR=0.46 (0.36; 0.58)], naproxen [OR=0.66 (0.53; 0.83)] and salicylates [OR=0.45 (0.27; 0.78)] while less tolerated when compared to meloxicam [OR=1.49 (1.05; 2.13)]. Major GI effects were comparable among piroxicam users as in comparator drugs users [OR=1.33 (0.96; 1.84)], except for meloxicam [OR=2.37 (1.13; 4.97)]. The skin safety of piroxicam was statistically comparable to those of comparators [OR=1.01 (0.68; 1.51)]. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis of RCTs support a similar to more favourable efficacy/safety profile of piroxicam as compared to other t-NSAIDs. [less ▲]Detailed reference viewed: 82 (8 ULg)
Efficacy and safety of rimonabant for improvement of multiple cardiometabolic risk factors in overweight/obese patients: pooled 1-year data from the Rimonabant in Obesity (RIO) program.
; ; et al
in Diabetes Care (2008), 31 Suppl 2
OBJECTIVE: To better define the efficacy and safety of rimonabant, the first selective cannabinoid type 1 (CB(1)) receptor antagonist, in a large population of overweight and obese patients using pooled ... [more ▼]
OBJECTIVE: To better define the efficacy and safety of rimonabant, the first selective cannabinoid type 1 (CB(1)) receptor antagonist, in a large population of overweight and obese patients using pooled efficacy data from three Phase III nondiabetes Rimonabant in Obesity and Related Metabolic Disorders (RIO) studies, selected efficacy data from the RIO-Diabetes study, and pooled safety data for all four RIO studies. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The RIO studies enrolled patients who were either overweight (BMI >27 kg/m(2)) with at least one comorbidity (i.e., hypertension, dyslipidemia, or, for RIO-Diabetes, type 2 diabetes) or obese. All patients received daily treatment with rimonabant (5 or 20 mg) or placebo for 1 year plus a hypocaloric diet (600 kcal/day deficit) and advice on increased physical activity. RIO-Europe (n = 1,508), RIO-North America (n = 3,045), and RIO-Lipids (n = 1,036) excluded patients with type 2 diabetes; untreated dyslipidemia was an entry requirement for RIO-Lipids. RIO-Diabetes (n = 1,047) required the presence of type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by sulfonylurea or metformin monotherapy. RESULTS: The pooled intention-to-treat population comprised 5,580 patients without diabetes (3,165 completed treatment) and 1,047 patients with diabetes (692 completed treatment). Most efficacy measures improved during the 4-week placebo run-in period, except that HDL cholesterol decreased as expected in the early phase of a hypocaloric diet. After 1 year of randomized treatment, changes from baseline with 20 mg rimonabant in the nondiabetic population were as follows: body weight -6.5 kg, waist circumference -6.4 cm, HDL cholesterol +16.4%, triglycerides -6.9%, fasting insulin -0.6 muU/ml, and homeostasis model assessment for insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) -0.2 (all P < 0.001 vs. placebo). In the diabetic population, 20 mg rimonabant reduced A1C levels by 0.6% (P < 0.001 vs. placebo). Regression analysis of change in HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, adiponectin (in RIO-Lipids), and A1C (in RIO-Diabetes) versus body weight at 1 year by ANCOVA suggested that 45-57% of the effect of rimonabant could not be explained by the observed weight loss. At 1 year, adverse events more frequently reported with rimonabant were gastrointestinal, neurological, and psychiatric in nature. Serious adverse events were infrequent and almost equivalent to placebo. Overall discontinuation rates were similar across treatment groups, except discontinuation from adverse events, which occurred more frequently with 20 mg rimonabant versus placebo (most commonly, depressive disorders [1.9 vs. 0.8%], nausea [1.4 vs. 0.1%], mood alterations with depressive symptoms [1.0 vs. 0.6%], and anxiety [1.0 vs. 0.3%]). A thorough review of psychiatric and neurological adverse events was performed. CONCLUSIONS: In overweight/obese patients, 20 mg/day rimonabant produced weight loss and significant improvements in multiple cardiometabolic risk factors such as waist circumference, A1C, HDL cholesterol, and triglycerides. Rimonabant was generally well tolerated, with more frequently reported adverse events being gastrointestinal, neurological, and psychiatric in nature. [less ▲]Detailed reference viewed: 33 (3 ULg)
Efficacy 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 ; ; 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: 39 (1 ULg)
Efficacy and safety of strontium ranelate in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis : a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled international trial
; ; et al
in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2012), 71(3), 693Detailed reference viewed: 37 (1 ULg)
Efficacy and safety of strontium ranelate in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: results of a double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial.
Reginster, Jean-Yves ; ; 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)
Efficacy and safety of strontium ranelate in the treatment of knee ostoarthritis : a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled international trial
Reginster, Jean-Yves ; ; et al
in Osteoporosis International (2011), 22(S5), 742-743Detailed reference viewed: 56 (1 ULg)
Efficacy and safety of tacrolimus compared with ciclosporin A in renal transplantation: three-year observational results
; ; 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: 69 (13 ULg)
Efficacy and safety of tacrolimus compared with ciclosporin A microemulsion in renal transplantation: 2 year follow-up results
; ; 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: 71 (20 ULg)
Efficacy 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
; ; 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)
Efficacy and safety of the weight-loss drug rimonabant.
; ; et al
in Lancet (2008), 371(9612), 555556-7Detailed reference viewed: 31 (4 ULg)
Efficacy and tolerability of a monophasic oral contraceptive containing ethinylestradiol and drospirenone.
; Foidart, Jean-Michel ; 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: 22 (1 ULg)
Efficacy and Tolerability of a New Formulation of Oral Tiludronate (Tablet) in the Treatment of Paget's Disease of Bone
Reginster, Jean-Yves ; ; 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: 7 (1 ULg)
Efficacy and Tolerability of Calcitonin in the Prevention and Treatment of Osteoporosis
; Reginster, Jean-Yves
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: 9 (4 ULg)
Efficacy and tolerability of intravenous ibandronate injections in postmenopausal osteoporosis: 2-year results from the DIVA study.
; ; 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: 16 (4 ULg)
Efficacy 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.
; ; 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: 128 (0 ULg)
Efficacy and tolerability of olmesartan medoxomil in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension - The OLMEBEST Study
; ; 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: 47 (2 ULg)