scholarly journals Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial of IncobotulinumtoxinA for Sialorrhea in Children: SIPEXI

Neurology ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 10.1212/WNL.0000000000012573
Author(s):  
Steffen Berweck ◽  
Marcin Bonikowski ◽  
Heakyung Kim ◽  
Michael Althaus ◽  
Birgit Flatau-Baqué ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Disability ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Active Treatment ◽  
Neurological Disorders ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Search Query ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Open Label Extension ◽  
Main Period

Background and Objectives:This prospective phase III study (SIPEXI) investigated efficacy and safety of repeated injections of incobotulinumtoxinA (incoBoNT/A) for treatment of chronic sialorrhea (drooling) associated with neurological disorders (e.g., cerebral palsy, traumatic brain injury) and/or intellectual disability in children/adolescents.Methods:The study enrolled 2-17-year-olds with sialorrhea due to neurological disorders and/or intellectual disability. Patients received body weight-dependent doses of incoBoNT/A (20 U to 75 U). A main period with 1 injection cycle (placebo-controlled, double-blind, 6-17-year-olds) was followed by an open-label extension with up to 3 further cycles. An additional cohort of 2-5-year-olds received active treatment throughout the study. Co-primary endpoints were the change in unstimulated salivary flow rate (uSFR) from baseline to week 4, and the carers’ global impression of change scale (GICS) rating at week 4. Adverse events were recorded.Results:In the main period, 220 patients aged 6-17 years were randomized and treated (148 patients in incoBoNT/A group, 72 patients in placebo group). 35 patients aged 2-5 years received incoBoNT/A (no placebo). 214 patients aged 6-17 years and 33 patients aged 2-5 years continued treatment in the open-label extension period. For the 6-17-year-olds, a significant difference between incoBoNT/A and placebo was seen in the mean uSFR decrease (difference: -0.06 g/min; p = 0.0012) and the carers’ GICS rating (difference: 0.28 points; p = 0.032) at week 4, in favor of active treatment. The secondary endpoints consistently supported these results. A sustained benefit was observed during the extension. Incidences of adverse events were comparable between incoBoNT/A and placebo and did not increase notably with repeated injections. The most common adverse events were respiratory infections. Efficacy and safety were also favorable in the uncontrolled cohort of 2-5-year-olds.Discussion:Both co-primary efficacy endpoints were reached and superiority of incoBoNT/A over placebo was confirmed. IncoBoNT/A (up to 75 U, up to 4 cycles) is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for sialorrhea associated with neurological disorders in children.Study registrations:Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02270736 (www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/results/NCT02270736); EU Clinical Trials Register: 2013-004532-30 (www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/search?query=2013-004532-30).Classification of evidence:This study provides Class I evidence that injection of incobotulinumtoxinA decreases drooling in children aged 6-17 years with neurological disorders.

scholarly journals Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Erenumab

Neurology ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 10.1212/WNL.0000000000012029
Author(s):  
Peter J. Goadsby ◽  
Uwe Reuter ◽  
Michel Lanteri-Minet ◽  
Gabriel Paiva da Silva Lima ◽  
Peggy Hours-Zesiger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Phase ◽  
Episodic Migraine ◽  
Responder Rate ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Sustained Efficacy ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Sustained Effects ◽  
Open Label Extension

ObjectiveTo report the efficacy and safety of erenumab among episodic migraine (EM) patients who were unsuccessful on 2–4 preventive treatments observed at week 64 of Open-Label Extension Phase (OLEP) of the LIBERTY study (ClinicalTrials.govNCT03096834).MethodsThe OLEP evaluating monthly erenumab 140 mg for 3 years, enrolled 240 patients who completed the double-blind treatment phase (DBTP) of 12 weeks during which they received placebo or erenumab 140 mg subcutaneous injections every 4 weeks as monotherapy. Efficacy outcomes were evaluated through the initial 52 weeks of OLEP (from DBTP baseline to total 64 weeks) in the overall population, patients receiving erenumab in DBTP, and patients from DBTP placebo arm who switched to erenumab in OLEP. Endpoints included reduction of ≥50% in monthly migraine days (MMD) from DBTP baseline and change in MMD from DBTP baseline, Headache Impact Test, and Migraine Physical Function Impact Diary (Physical Impairment and Everyday Activities) scores.ResultsAltogether, the week 52 visit of the OLEP was completed by 204/240 (85.0%) patients. Among patients continuing erenumab, the 50% responder rate increase from 29.9% at weeks 9%–12% to 44.3% at week 61–64. The 50% responder rate in patients who initiated erenumab in the OLEP remained higher in the OLEP (50.0% at week 61–64) than during DBTP (14.2% at weeks 9–12) compared to patients in continuous erenumab arm. In the OLEP, the 50% responder rate for the overall population increased from weeks 13–16 until weeks 37–40 and then remained stable through weeks 61–64. Patients treated with erenumab in DBTP showed sustained effects on all efficacy outcomes; those initiating erenumab in the OLEP demonstrated continued improvement from week 13 onward. Adverse events (AEs) were reported, considering both treatment groups, by ∼80.8% (serious AEs [SAEs] by 6.7%); 76.3% (5.9%) in the continuing erenumab arm; and 85.2% (7.4%) in those starting erenumab in OLEP. No deaths were reported.ConclusionsIn patients with EM who were unsuccessful on 2–4 prior preventive treatments, the LIBERTY study demonstrated sustained efficacy on erenumab monotherapy treatment through 64 weeks in both treatment arms. Safety of erenumab was consistent with that observed in previous clinical trials.Classification of evidenceThe current study provides Class IV evidence on data from patients with episodic migraine, that erenumab is safe and provides sustained efficacy at 52 weeks.Clinicaltrials.gov identifierNCT03096834.

scholarly journals Comparison of Safety and Tolerability of Deutetrabenazine During Titration and Maintenance in Patients with Tardive Dyskinesia

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 164-180
Author(s):  
Amanda Wilhelm ◽  
Karen E. Anderson ◽  
Hubert H. Fernandez ◽  
Hadas Barkay ◽  
Nayla Chaijale ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Suicidal Ideation ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Tardive Dyskinesia ◽  
Dry Mouth ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Open Label Extension ◽  
Pharmaceutical Industries ◽  
Flexible Dose

AbstractBackgroundDeutetrabenazine is approved to treat tardive dyskinesia (TD) in adults and is titrated weekly by 6 mg/day, from 12 to 48 mg/day, based on dyskinesia control and tolerability. This analysis compared the safety of deutetrabenazine during titration versus maintenance.MethodsSafety was assessed during titration versus maintenance using integrated data from two 12-week placebo-controlled studies (ARM-TD and AIM-TD) and the open-label extension study. Rates were compared for overall and serious adverse events (AEs), AEs leading to discontinuation, treatment-related AEs, common AEs (≥4%), and specific AEs (parkinsonism, suicidal ideation, akathisia, restlessness).ResultsIn titration versus maintenance, AE rates with placebo (n=130) were: overall, 43.1% vs 25.4%; serious, 4.6% vs 2.3%; leading to discontinuation, 3.1% vs 0; treatment-related, 26.9% vs 10.0%. For placebo, common AEs during titration were somnolence, headache, nausea, fatigue, and dry mouth; none occurred during maintenance. In titration versus maintenance, AE rates in fixed-dose deutetrabenazine 12–36 mg (n=216) were: overall, 33.3–38.9% vs 22.2–29.2%; serious, 2.8–6.9% vs 0–1.4%; leading to discontinuation, 2.8–5.6% vs 0; treatment-related, 8.3–16.7% vs 8.3–13.9%. For fixed-dose deutetrabenazine, common AEs during titration were headache, diarrhea, nasopharyngitis, depression, hypertension, and dry mouth; headache was the only common AE during maintenance. In titration versus maintenance, AE rates with flexible-dose deutetrabenazine (n=168) were: overall, 49.4% vs 32.7%; serious, 3.6% vs 2.4%; leading to discontinuation, 2.4% vs 0.6%. For flexible-dose deutetrabenazine, the only common AE during titration was somnolence; none occurred during maintenance. Rates of parkinsonism, suicidal ideation, akathisia, and restlessness were low and comparable in titration and maintenance.ConclusionsDeutetrabenazine was well-tolerated, with AE rates similar to placebo during both phases; AE rates were higher during titration and decreased during maintenance.FundingTeva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Petach Tikva, Israel

scholarly journals POS1038 THE EFFECT OF FILGOTINIB ON ENTHESITIS: 100-WEEK DATA FROM AN OPEN-LABEL EXTENSION STUDY IN PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 792.2-793
Author(s):  
P. Helliwell ◽  
L. C. Coates ◽  
F. Van den Bosch ◽  
D. D. Gladman ◽  
L. Gheyle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Treatment Effect ◽  
Janus Kinase ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Rapid Improvement ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Lateral Epicondyle ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Open Label Extension ◽  
Discriminatory Capacity

Background:Filgotinib (FIL), a novel preferential Janus kinase 1 inhibitor, was assessed in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in the 16-week, Phase 2, EQUATOR trial (NCT03101670).1 EQUATOR2 (NCT03320876) is the open-label extension (OLE). As previously reported, an interim analysis of the OLE showed that the majority of patients had clinical resolution of enthesitis by Week 52.2Objectives:This post-hoc analysis evaluated the effect of FIL on clinical enthesitis after 100 weeks of treatment in the OLE, as assessed using the Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI) and Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) index, and evaluated the discriminatory capacity of the two indices. In addition, we assessed which of the sites included in LEI and SPARCC were most frequently involved and whether treatment effect was consistent across sites.Methods:In EQUATOR, patients with active moderate-to-severe PsA (≥5 swollen joints and ≥5 tender joints, fulfilling Classification for PsA criteria) were randomised 1:1 to receive oral FIL 200 mg or placebo (PBO) once daily (QD) for 16 weeks. At Week 16, all patients could continue into the OLE, receiving FIL 200 mg QD for up to an additional 304 weeks. We compared changes from core baseline in LEI and SPARCC measures, the effect on enthesitis at sites included in LEI and SPARCC assessments and the discriminatory capacity of both enthesitis indices.Results:Of 131 patients randomised to EQUATOR, 122 entered the OLE. There was strong agreement between LEI and SPARCC at baseline. While most patients had enthesitis at baseline according to either index (76/131 [58.0%] by LEI; 85/131 [64.9%] by SPARCC), a minority had enthesitis at a large number of sites (6.9% with 5–6 LEI sites; 12.2% with ≥9 SPARCC sites). The sites most frequently involved at baseline were the lateral epicondyle humerus and Achilles tendon, sites common to both LEI and SPARCC. There was greater variability in the change from baseline to Week 16 in SPARCC compared with LEI (Table 1). LEI showed a greater discriminatory capacity than SPARCC when change from baseline was compared for FIL vs PBO at Week 16, as shown by higher absolute standardised mean difference: −0.70 (LEI) and −0.30 (SPARCC) (observed cases; Table 1). Subgroup analyses indicated that the treatment effect of FIL vs PBO at Week 16 for all sites was consistent with the overall treatment effect seen for LEI or SPARCC, and indicative of an improvement with FIL vs PBO for nearly all sites. The proportion of patients with enthesitis decreased from baseline up to OLE Week 100 (Figure 1). There were no major differences in long-term effect on enthesitis between sites.Conclusion:FIL improved enthesitis consistently across sites compared with PBO. Rapid improvement in enthesitis was seen up to Week 16 of the core study and improvements continued up to Week 52, after which responses were generally stable up to Week 100. LEI assesses fewer locations than SPARCC, but reassuringly captured the sites most commonly affected by enthesitis; LEI also had greater discriminatory capacity.References:[1]Mease P, et al. Lancet 2018;392:2367–77[2]Mease P, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol 2020;72(suppl 10): abstract 0910Figure 1.Acknowledgements:EQUATOR and EQUATOR2 were sponsored by Galapagos NV (Mechelen, Belgium) and co-funded by Galapagos NV and Gilead Sciences, Inc (Foster City, CA, USA). Eline Vetters, Leen Gilles, Benjamin Pett and his team, all employees of Galapagos, provided assistance with statistical analyses. Medical writing/editorial support was provided by Debbie Sherwood, BSc, CMPP (Aspire Scientific, Bollington, UK), and funded by Galapagos NV.Disclosure of Interests:Philip Helliwell Speakers bureau: Janssen, Novartis, Paid instructor for: Pfizer, Consultant of: Eli Lilly, Laura C Coates Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Medac, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Novartis, and Pfizer, Filip van den Bosch Consultant of: AbbVie, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Merck and UCB, Dafna D Gladman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Lien Gheyle Shareholder of: Galapagos, Employee of: Galapagos, Mona Trivedi Shareholder of: Gilead Sciences, Amgen, Employee of: Gilead Sciences, Muhsen Alani Shareholder of: Gilead Sciences, Employee of: Gilead Sciences, Franck Olivier Le Brun Shareholder of: Galapagos, Employee of: Galapagos, Robin Besuyen Shareholder of: Galapagos, Employee of: Galapagos, Philip J Mease Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN and UCB.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety associated with the infusion speed of intravenous immunoglobulin for the treatment of Kawasaki disease: a randomized controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Saori Fukui ◽  
Mitsuru Seki ◽  
Takaomi Minami ◽  
Kazuhiko Kotani ◽  
Kensuke Oka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Kawasaki Disease ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Intravenous Immunoglobulin ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Cell Counts ◽  
Infusion Speed ◽  
Ivig Administration

Abstract Background High-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) is the mainstay of treatment for Kawasaki disease (KD). Usually, 2 g/kg of IVIG is administered over 10–24 h, depending on the institution or physician, but the association between infusion speed and effectiveness has not been reported. In this study, we evaluated the differences in efficacy and safety between two different IVIG administration speeds. Methods This was a multicenter, unblinded, randomized controlled study. Patients newly diagnosed with KD were randomized into two groups: one who received IVIG over 12 h (12H group, double speed), and one that received IVIG over 24 h (24H group, reference speed). The endpoints included the duration of fever, incidence of coronary artery abnormalities (CAAs) and of adverse events. Laboratory data were evaluated before and after IVIG administration. Results A total of 39 patients were enrolled. There was no difference between groups in fever duration after the initiation of IVIG (21 h vs. 21.5 h, p = 0.325), and no patient experienced CAAs. Two adverse events were observed in the 12H group (elevation of aspartate aminotransferase and vomiting), however no severe adverse events requiring treatments or extension of hospital stay were observed in either group. After initial IVIG administration, the change ratio of inflammatory markers, such as white blood cell counts, neutrophils, C-reactive protein, and albumin, did not show significant differences between the two groups. On the other hand, a greater increase of serum immunoglobulin G from its baseline level was observed in the 24H group compared to the 12H group (3037 ± 648 mg/dl vs. 2414 ± 248 mg/dl, p < 0.01). Conclusion The efficacy and safety of IVIG administered over 12 h (double speed) were similar to those administered over 24 h (reference speed). Trial registration University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN000014665). Registered 27 July 2014 – Prospectively registered, https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000017058

Allopurinol dose escalation to achieve serum urate below 6 mg/dL: an open-label extension study

2017 ◽  
Vol 76 (12) ◽  
pp. 2065-2070 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa K Stamp ◽  
Peter T Chapman ◽  
Murray Barclay ◽  
Anne Horne ◽  
Christopher Frampton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Dose Escalation ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Serum Urate ◽  
Extension Study ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Open Label Extension ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Kidney Impairment

ObjectivesTo determine the long-term safety and efficacy of allopurinol dose escalation (DE) to achieve target serum urate (SU) in gout.MethodsPeople, including those with chronic kidney disease, who completed the first 12 months of a randomised controlled trial continued into a 12-month extension study. Participants randomised to continue current dose for the first 12 months began allopurinol DE at month 12 if SU was ≥6 mg/dL (control/DE). Immediate DE participants who achieved target SU maintained allopurinol dose (DE/DE). The primary endpoints were reduction in SU and adverse events (AEs) at month 24.ResultsThe mean (SE) change in SU from month 12 to 24 was −1.1 (0.2) mg/dL in control/DE and 0.1 (0.2) mg/dL in DE/DE group (p<0.001). There was a significant reduction in the percentage of individuals having a gout flare in the month prior to months 12 and 24 compared with baseline in both groups and in mean tophus size over 24 months, but no difference between randomised groups. There were similar numbers of AEs and serious adverse events between groups.ConclusionsThe majority of people with gout tolerate higher than creatinine clearance-based allopurinol dose and achieve and maintain target SU. Slow allopurinol DE may be appropriate in clinical practice even in those with kidney impairment.Trial registration numberACTRN12611000845932

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document