Weight-related safety outcomes of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in children and adolescents with ADHD: Post-hoc analysis from a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, multicentre, parallel-group, placebo- and active-controlled, dose-optimized study in Europe

2012 ◽  
Vol 60 (5) ◽  
pp. S263
Author(s):  
A. Zuddas ◽  
D.R. Coghill ◽  
T. Banaschewski ◽  
C. Soutullo ◽  
A. Lynes ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Kazuomi Kario ◽  
Sadayoshi Ito ◽  
Hiroshi Itoh ◽  
Hiromi Rakugi ◽  
Yasuyuki Okuda ◽  
...  

Abstract BACKGROUND Nocturnal hypertension is an important phenotype of abnormal diurnal blood pressure (BP) variability and a known risk marker for target organ damage and cardiovascular events. This study aimed to assess the differential BP-lowering effects of esaxerenone vs. eplerenone on nocturnal BP in hypertensive patients with different nocturnal dipping patterns. METHODS This was a post hoc analysis of the “Esaxerenone (CS-3150) Compared to Eplerenone in Patients with Essential Hypertension” study (NCT02890173), which was a phase 3, multicenter, randomized, controlled, double-blind, parallel-group clinical study conducted in Japan. Ambulatory BP monitoring data were collected. RESULTS Patients (n = 1,001) were randomized to esaxerenone 2.5 mg/day (n = 331) or 5 mg/day (n = 338), or eplerenone 50 mg/day (n = 332). Reductions in nighttime systolic BP (95% confidence interval) were significantly greater with 2.5 and 5 mg/day esaxerenone vs. eplerenone (−2.6 [−5.0, −0.2] and −6.4 mm Hg [−8.8, −4.0], respectively). Esaxerenone significantly reduced nighttime BP from baseline compared with eplerenone in non-dippers with previously uncontrolled BP. In addition, esaxerenone did not markedly alter nighttime BP in extreme dipper patients. In the esaxerenone 5 mg/day group, esaxerenone-induced decreases in nighttime BP were greater than eplerenone-induced decreases in older patients. CONCLUSIONS Esaxerenone may be an effective treatment option for nocturnal hypertension, especially in older patients and those with a non-dipper pattern of nocturnal BP.


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1011.1-1011
Author(s):  
M. C. Kapetanovic ◽  
M. Andersson ◽  
A. Friedman ◽  
T. Shaw ◽  
Y. Song ◽  
...  

Background:Early treatment of RA within the therapeutic window(0-3 months from symptom onset), has been associated with improved clinical outcomes and physical function. However, ≤42% of RA patients(pts) visit a rheumatologist within 90 days of symptom onset1,2.Objectives:To assess safety and efficacy of Upadacitinib(UPA), an oral, reversible, potent JAK-1 selective inhibitor3, in pts with moderate to severely active RA who were MTX-naïve or had an inadequate response to csDMARDs/bDMARDs4-6.Methods:In SELECT–EARLY, MTX-naïve pts with active RA and poor prognosis were randomized 1:1:1 to once-daily UPA monotherapy at 15 or 30 mg or weekly MTX (titrated up to 20 mg/week through Week 8). Efficacy (including ACR, DAS28(CRP), CDAI responses and change in mTSS) and safety outcomes from a post-hoc analysis of patients who received treatment within 90 days from diagnosis are reported here. The statistical significance defined asp<0.05was exploratory in nature.Results:A total of 270 pts commenced treatment within 90 days from RA diagnosis (median: 44 days [11, 89]). Pts in each arm were mostly female (70%), had moderately to severely active RA with mean DAS28(CRP) =5.9±1.02, had structural joint damage (mean mTSS =7.7±21.5) and were seropositive for both ACPA and RF at baseline (72%)4. At Week 24, compared to MTX, significantly greater proportions of pts receiving UPA 15 or 30 mg monotherapy achieved efficacy outcomes including ACR20, 50 and 70 responses, DAS28CRP<2.6, CDAI≤2.8 or Boolean remission. Improvements in physical function (HAQ-DI) and decrease in pain were also significantly greater in pts receiving UPA 15 and 30 mg vs MTX at Week 24. Treatment with UPA was also associated with a greater inhibition of structural joint damage compared with MTX (Figure 1). Safety outcomes were consistent with the full study and the integrated safety analysis (all phase 3 studies of UPA). Compared to MTX, higher frequencies of serious infections and herpes zoster were reported in both UPA groups. There were 2 deaths in total (UPA 30 mg: 1 due to cardiovascular death and 1 due to pneumonia and sepsis) (Figure 2).Conclusion:In RA pts, early initiation of treatment with UPA 15 mg and 30 mg monotherapy within 3 months from diagnosis was associated with clinically meaningful improvements in efficacy, including remission and inhibition of progression of structural joint damage compared to MTX. The safety profile was consistent with the overall study and the integrated phase 3 safety analysis7. UPA seems to be a promising treatment option for more patients to reach their treatment targets of remission or low disease activity when treated within 3 months of diagnosis.References:[1]Raza K et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70(10):1822-5.[2]Stack RJ et al. BMJ Open. 2019;9:e024361.[3]Parmentier et al. BMC Rheumatol. 2018;2:23.[4]van Vollenhoven R et al, Arth Rheumatol. 2018; 70 (s10) [Abs ACR2018].[5]Burmester GR et al. Lancet 2018;391:2503-12.[6]Genovese MC et al, Lancet 2018;391:2513-24.[7]Cohen S et al, Ann Rheum Dis [Abs EULAR2019].Disclosure of Interests:Meliha C Kapetanovic: None declared, Maria Andersson Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Alan Friedman Shareholder of: AbbVie Inc, Employee of: AbbVie Inc, Tim Shaw Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Yanna Song Shareholder of: AbbVie Inc., Employee of: AbbVie Inc., Daniel Aletaha Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis, Roche, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Lilly, Medac, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi Genzyme, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celgene, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi Genzyme, UCB, Maya H Buch Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Consultant of: Pfizer; AbbVie; Eli Lilly; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Merck-Serono; Sandoz; and Sanofi, Ulf Müller-Ladner Speakers bureau: Biogen, Janet Pope Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly & Company, Merck, Roche, Seattle Genetics, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Actelion, Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eicos Sciences, Eli Lilly & Company, Emerald, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, UCB, Speakers bureau: UCB


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document