The GO-BACK study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of golimumab (GLM) treatment withdrawal in adults with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) who demonstrate inactive disease during a 10-month open-label (OL) GLM run-in.Eligible participants received OL GLM in period 1. In period 2, participants who achieved inactive disease were randomized 1:1:1 to receive double-blind (DB) treatment with monthly placebo (PBO, treatment withdrawal) or continued GLM treatment given monthly (GLM QMT) or every 2 months (GLM Q2MT). Participants who did not have a disease flare continued DB treatment for ∼12 months. Participants with a disease flare discontinued DB treatment and resumed monthly OL GLM. Primary endpoint compared the proportion of participants without a disease flare in the continued GLM treatment groups (QMT or Q2MT) vs PBO in a multiplicity-controlled, step-down fashion. Safety follow-up continued for ∼3 months after last treatment.A total of 188 patients, out of the 323 enrolled, were eligible for participation in period 2. Both GLM QMT and GLM Q2MT were superior to treatment withdrawal (PBO) in preventing disease flare (P < 0.001), with a treatment-difference vs PBO of 50.4% and 34.4% for the GLM QMT and GLM Q2MT groups, respectively. The time-to-first flare was significantly longer (log-rank P < 0.0001) with GLM treatment compared with PBO. Of 53 participants (in Q2MT or PBO) who had a confirmed disease flare, 51 (96.2%) attained a clinical response within 3 months of restarting OL GLM. Adverse events were consistent with the known GLM safety profile.Among participants with active nr-axSpA who attained inactive disease after 10 months of GLM treatment, continued GLM treatment is well tolerated and provides superior protection against disease flares compared with GLM withdrawal. (EudraCT: 2015-004020-65, registered on 30 March 2022; NCT: 03253796, registered on 18 August 2017.).
Abstract Background Results from a phase III, randomized, double-blind, active comparator-controlled, parallel-group trial evaluating fosaprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) found that a single-day, triple-antiemetic fosaprepitant regimen resulted in a significantly higher proportion of patients achieving a complete response (CR; no vomiting or rescue medication use) in the delayed phase (25–120 h after chemotherapy initiation), compared with a 3-day control regimen ( ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01594749). As the risk for CINV is dependent on chemotherapy regimen and generally guided by tumor type, this post hoc analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of this regimen by cancer subpopulations (gastrointestinal [GI] or colorectal, lung, breast, and gynecologic cancers). Methods Subjects with confirmed cancer who were naive to highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC and MEC) and were scheduled to receive intravenous (IV) anthracycline-cyclophosphamide (AC)–based MEC on the first day of chemotherapy were randomly assigned to receive oral ondansetron and oral dexamethasone plus either a single IV dose of fosaprepitant 150 mg (fosaprepitant regimen) or placebo (control regimen). The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of subjects achieving CR in the delayed phase. CR rates in the overall and acute phases (0–120 h and 0–24 h after MEC initiation, respectively) were assessed as secondary end points. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. Results CR rates in the delayed phase favored the fosaprepitant regimen over the control regimen across the GI/colorectal, lung, breast, and gynecologic cancer subgroups (range, 6.2–22%); similar findings were observed for CR in the overall phase. CR in the acute phase was high for all groups (≥87%). The fosaprepitant regimen was well tolerated in all cancer subgroups. Conclusions This post hoc analysis indicated that a single-day fosaprepitant regimen was effective in preventing CINV in patients receiving MEC, regardless of cancer type. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01594749 , registered May 9, 2012.
Introduction. Inhaled delivery devices that are easy to use and facilitate dose tracking may lead to improved patient satisfaction and adherence. Patient satisfaction with a metered-dose inhaler (MDI) with an integrated dose counter containing a fixed-dose mometasone furoate/formoterol combination (MF/F MDI dose counter) was evaluated in subjects with persistent asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Methods. In this multicenter study (N = 272, age range: 12–92 years), subject experience and satisfaction with MDI devices was evaluated using baseline and poststudy surveys. Subjects responded to the baseline survey based on their previous MDI experience, then received MF/F MDI 100/10 μg with the integrated dose counter for 4 weeks before completing the poststudy survey. This evaluation was part of a broader study objective to assess performance of the MF/F MDI dose counter. Results. At baseline, 52% of subjects reported being extremely satisfied with their previous MDI. After using the MF/F MDI dose counter, a relative increase of 43% in overall satisfaction was observed. Approximately 90% of subjects agreed the MF/F dose counter helped them track doses and was easy to use; >80% agreed the inhaler was of good quality and well designed. Subjects agreed the dose counter relieved anxiety about running out of medication (68%) or taking a subtherapeutic dose (65%). Nearly 80% of subjects had no reservations about the MF/F MDI dose counter, and most subjects stated they would request it from their physician (66%) and recommend it to a friend (75%). Conclusions. The MF/F MDI dose counter was found to be easy to use and have overall high patient satisfaction.
Abstract Background This analysis evaluated the incidence of all-cause colectomies (total or partial) among patients with moderate-to-severe active ulcerative colitis (UC) in the golimumab (GLM) Program of Ulcerative Colitis Utilizing an Investigational Treatment (PURSUIT)-maintenance (-M) and long-term extension (-LTE) studies. Methods Eligible PURSUIT-M trial participants completed a 6-week GLM induction trial without requiring colectomy. Responders to GLM induction were randomized 1:1:1 to GLM 50 mg, GLM 100 mg, or placebo (PBO) maintenance for up to 1 year, administered every 4 weeks (q4w). Nonresponders to GLM or PBO induction received GLM 100 mg; responders to PBO induction received PBO (each administered q4w for up to 1 year). Participants who completed PURSUIT-M were eligible to continue their treatment in the 3-year PURSUIT-LTE study. Results A total of 60 (4.9%) colectomies were reported among the 1228 patients who enrolled in the 1-year PURSUIT-M study, which included 672 participants who continued into the 3-year PURSUIT-LTE LTE study (of which 666 were treated). The colectomy rate during the 3-year extension was lower than that observed during the maintenance phase of the study (9/666 [1.4%] compared to 51/1228 [4.2%]). The majority (43/60 [71.7%]) of the reported colectomies occurred in patients who had not responded to induction therapy and who tended to have had more severe disease characteristics at baseline. Conclusions This retrospective evaluation of colectomy data from the PURSUIT-M and -LTE studies in patients with moderate-to-severe active UC demonstrated a low (<5%) occurrence of colectomy with long-term (up to 4 years) GLM treatment. PURSUIT-M (NCT00488631; EudraCT, 2006-003399-37).
9629 Background: This is the first study performed to directly evaluate the efficacy and safety of a single dose of intravenous (IV) fosaprepitant (FA), an NK1 receptor antagonist, used with a 5-HT3 antagonist and corticosteroid in subjects receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). Methods: This was a global, phase 3, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study in adult subjects naive to MEC and highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) scheduled to receive an IV dose of ≥ 1 MEC agents on treatment day 1. Subjects were randomly assigned 1:1 to a control or FA regimen. Those in the control regimen received 8 mg oral ondansetron, 20 mg dexamethasone, and IV saline as placebo before the first dose of MEC on day 1, and 8 mg oral ondansetron 8 hours after the first dose, followed by 8 mg oral ondansetron every 12 hours on days 2 and 3. Those in the FA regimen received the same dose of oral ondansetron on day 1, along with 12 mg dexamethasone and a single dose of 150 mg IV FA before the first dose of MEC on day 1, with no additional prophylactic antiemetic beyond day 1. Primary outcomes were the proportion of subjects with a complete response (CR: no vomiting and no rescue medication use) during the delayed phase (25 to 120 hours after MEC) and FA safety/tolerability. Results: Baseline characteristics were generally balanced among the 1000 subjects in the primary efficacy population (502 FA, 498 control). The majority were white, ≥ 50 years of age, and female. CR was achieved in 396 (78.9%) subjects in the FA regimen and 341 (68.5%) in the control regimen during the delayed phase (treatment difference of 10.4%, P < 0.001). Safety profiles were comparable between the treatment groups; drug-related adverse events occurred in 8.5% (FA) vs 9.1% (control). There were no cases of severe infusion-site pain, erythema, or induration reported; 3 cases of infusion-site thrombophlebitis were observed in the FA regimen compared with 0 in the control regimen. Conclusions: Single-dose 150-mg IV FA regimen is generally safe and well tolerated and provides superior control of CINV associated with MEC as measured by the proportion of subjects with CR in the delayed phase. Clinical trial information: NCT01594749.
