To assess the efficacy and safety of lasmiditan in the acute treatment of migraine.
Methods
Adult patients with migraine were randomized (1:1:1) to a double-blind dose of oral lasmiditan 200 mg, lasmiditan 100 mg, or placebo and were asked to treat their next migraine attack within 4 hours of onset. Over 48 hours after dosing, patients used an electronic diary to record headache pain and the presence of nausea, phonophobia, and photophobia, one of which was designated their most bothersome symptom (MBS).
Results
Of the 1,856 patients who treated an attack, 77.9% had ≥1 cardiovascular risk factors in addition to migraine. Compared with placebo, more patients dosed with lasmiditan 200 mg were free of headache pain at 2 hours after dosing (32.2% vs 15.3%; odds ratio [OR] 2.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.0–3.6, p< 0.001), similar to those dosed with lasmiditan 100 mg (28.2%; OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.6–3.0, p< 0.001). Furthermore, compared with those dosed with placebo, more patients dosed with lasmiditan 200 mg (40.7% vs 29.5%; OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.3–2.1, p< 0.001) and lasmiditan 100 mg (40.9%; OR 1.7, 95% CI, 1.3–2.2, p< 0.001) were free of their MBS at 2 hours after dosing. Adverse events were mostly mild or moderate in intensity.
Conclusions
Lasmiditan dosed at 200 and 100 mg was efficacious and well tolerated in the treatment of acute migraine among patients with a high level of cardiovascular risk factors.
ClinicalTrials.gov identifier
NCT02439320.
Classification of evidence
This study provides Class I evidence that for adult patients with migraine, lasmiditan increases the proportion of subjects who are headache pain free at 2 hours after treating a migraine attack.
OBJECTIVE: This ongoing, Phase 3 trial is evaluating the efficacy and safety of 3 doses of arbaclofen placarbil (AP), compared with placebo, for treatment of spasticity in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS).
To evaluate pregabalin's efficacy and safety versus placebo to reduce pain in patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) using a concomitant nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug.In a randomized, double-masked, 14-week, 2-period, crossover study, patients with painful DPN using a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug for non-DPN-related pain received 150 to 300 mg/d pregabalin or placebo (period 1); 14-day washout; then, the opposite therapy (period 2). Endpoints included weekly change in DPN pain score, sleep interference, adverse events, and patient-reported outcomes.Patients with similar baseline characteristics were randomized (period 1) to 1 of the 2 following possible sequences: pregabalin→placebo (n=154) or placebo→pregabalin (n=147). Results of the primary efficacy measure, mean weekly DPN pain at endpoint, showed no significant difference between pregabalin and placebo. However, 1 sensitivity analysis (mixed-model repeated measures) found greater pain score reductions with pregabalin than placebo at weeks 2 to 4 and overall (all P<0.05). One secondary endpoint analysis, mean treatment difference in DPN-related sleep interference, favored pregabalin over placebo (P=0.0009). Other sensitivity and secondary analyses were nonsignificant. Treatment-emergent adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of pregabalin.Pregabalin (vs. placebo) showed overall improvements in sleep, pain reduction in 1 sensitivity analysis, and was well tolerated. Potential factors that may have confounded the ability to detect a treatment difference in DPN pain reduction (high placebo response, carryover effect, short washout period, or pregabalin dose) are discussed in the context of future studies.
Objective: To evaluate teriflunomide as add-on therapy to ongoing stable-dosed interferon-β (IFNβ) in patients with relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (RMS). Methods: A total of 118 patients with RMS were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive oral placebo or teriflunomide, 7 or 14 mg, once daily for 24 weeks; 86 patients entered the 24-week extension. The primary objective was to evaluate safety; secondary objectives were to evaluate the effects of treatment on disease activity assessed by MRI and relapse rate. Results: Teriflunomide was well tolerated with a low and similar incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) across the 3 groups; TEAEs led to treatment discontinuation of 4.9%, 8.1%, and 7.9% of patients in the placebo, 7-mg, and 14-mg groups, respectively. The number of gadolinium-enhancing T1 (T1-Gd) lesions was reduced in both teriflunomide groups, with relative risk reductions (RRRs) of 84.6% ( p = 0.0005) and 82.8% ( p < 0.0001) for 7 and 14 mg, respectively, compared with IFNβ alone at 48 weeks. T1-Gd lesion volume was also reduced in the 7-mg group (RRR 72.1%, p = 0.1104) and 14-mg group (RRR 70.6%, p = 0.0154). A trend toward dose-dependent reduction in annualized relapse rate was also noted (RRRs 32.6% [ p = 0.4355] and 57.9% [ p = 0.1005] for 7 and 14 mg, respectively). Conclusion: Teriflunomide as add-on therapy to IFNβ had acceptable safety and tolerability and reduced MRI disease activity compared with IFNβ alone. Classification of evidence: This study provides Class II evidence that teriflunomide, 7 and 14 mg, added to IFNβ, is safe. The T1-Gd lesion burden was significantly reduced with both teriflunomide doses. AE= : adverse event; ALT= : alanine aminotransferase; ARR= : annualized relapse rate; DMT= : disease-modifying therapy; EDSS= : Expanded Disability Status Scale; IFNβ= : interferon-β; MS= : multiple sclerosis; NAb= : neutralizing antibody; PML= : progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy; RMS= : relapsing multiple sclerosis; RRR= : relative risk reduction; TEAE= : treatment-emergent adverse event; TEMSO= : Teriflunomide Multiple Sclerosis Oral; T1-Gd= : gadolinium-enhancing T1; ULN= : upper limit of normal
OBJECTIVE This 24-week, double-blinded, phase 3 clinical trial (DEPICT-2; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02460978) evaluated efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin as adjunct therapy to adjustable insulin in patients with inadequately controlled type 1 diabetes (HbA1c 7.5–10.5%). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to dapagliflozin 5 mg (n = 271), dapagliflozin 10 mg (n = 270), or placebo (n = 272) plus insulin. Insulin dose was adjusted by investigators according to self-monitored glucose readings, local guidance, and individual circumstances. RESULTS Baseline characteristics were balanced between treatment groups. At week 24, dapagliflozin significantly decreased HbA1c (primary outcome; difference vs. placebo: dapagliflozin 5 mg −0.37% [95% CI −0.49, −0.26], dapagliflozin 10 mg –0.42% [−0.53, −0.30]), total daily insulin dose (−10.78% [−13.73, −7.72] and −11.08% [−14.04, −8.02], respectively), and body weight (−3.21% [−3.96, −2.45] and −3.74% [−4.49, −2.99], respectively) (P < 0.0001 for all). Mean interstitial glucose, amplitude of glucose excursion, and percent of readings within target glycemic range (>70 to ≤180 mg/dL) versus placebo were significantly improved. More patients receiving dapagliflozin achieved a reduction in HbA1c ≥0.5% without severe hypoglycemia compared with placebo. Adverse events were reported for 72.7%, 67.0%, and 63.2% of patients receiving dapagliflozin 5 mg, dapagliflozin 10 mg, and placebo, respectively. Hypoglycemia, including severe hypoglycemia, was balanced between groups. There were more adjudicated definite diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) events with dapagliflozin: 2.6%, 2.2%, and 0% for dapagliflozin 5 mg, dapagliflozin 10 mg, and placebo, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Dapagliflozin as adjunct therapy to adjustable insulin in patients with type 1 diabetes was well tolerated and improved glycemic control with no increase in hypoglycemia versus placebo but with more DKA events.
Objectives: To assess efficacy and safety of once-daily controlled-release (CR) formulation of pregabalin in patients with postherpetic neuralgia. Methods: An enriched enrollment, randomized withdrawal trial, with 6-week single-blind pregabalin treatment phase and 13-week double-blind phase, where patients with ≥50% decrease in mean pain score at single-blind end point from baseline were randomized (1:1) to pregabalin CR (82.5 to 660 mg/d) or placebo. Primary efficacy outcome was time to loss of therapeutic response (LTR) (<30% decrease in weekly mean pain score from single-blind baseline or discontinuation due to adverse event or lack of efficacy). Secondary efficacy outcomes included change in weekly mean pain score (1-wk recall period) at double-blind end point. Results: In total, 801 patients were randomized and treated in the single-blind phase, and 413 in the double-blind phase (208, pregabalin CR; 205, placebo). Pregabalin CR significantly increased time to LTR versus placebo (Kaplan-Meier analysis) with significantly fewer LTR events with pregabalin CR than with placebo (29 [13.9%] vs. 63 [30.7%]; P< 0.0001). Median time to LTR was not estimable. Pregabalin CR significantly improved weekly mean pain score versus placebo: LS mean difference (95% CI) of −1.11 (−1.47, −0.75) and −1.00 (−1.34, −0.65) ( P <0.0001) from single-blind baseline and double-blind baseline, respectively. Most commonly reported adverse events in the single-blind phase were dizziness, somnolence, and peripheral edema. Pregabalin CR was well tolerated. Discussion: Time to LTR was significantly longer with pregabalin CR than with placebo. Safety profile of pregabalin CR was comparable to that reported for the immediate-release formulation in patients with postherpetic neuralgia.
This article refers to:Once daily controlled-release pregabalin in the treatment of patients with fibromyalgia: a phase III, double-blind, randomized withdrawal, placebo-controlled study
Objectives: This study used a randomized withdrawal design to evaluate the efficacy of pregabalin versus placebo for pain relief in patients with painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy inadequately treated by other therapies. Methods: A total of 665 patients received pregabalin in a 6-week single-blind phase. Two hundred ninety-four patients who achieved a ≥30% pain response were randomized to receive pregabalin or placebo in a double-blind phase for a further 13 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in mean pain score from single-blind baseline to double-blind endpoint for pregabalin versus placebo (last observation carried forward [LOCF]). Secondary endpoints included a baseline observation carried forward (BOCF) analysis of mean pain score; time to loss of pain response; and other assessments of pain, sleep, function, and quality of life (QOL). Results: Pregabalin numerically improved all measures assessed during the single-blind phase. At the end of the double-blind withdrawal phase, there was no significant difference in the primary endpoint of mean pain score (LOCF) between pregabalin and placebo (least squares mean difference, −0.32), although there was a significant difference in the BOCF analysis (least squares mean difference, −0.51). Pregabalin was associated with a significantly longer time to loss of pain response versus placebo during double-blind treatment, and some aspects of sleep and QOL also showed significant improvements with pregabalin. Discussion: This is the first reported placebo-controlled trial of pregabalin in patients with inadequately treated painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy. Although the primary endpoint was not met, pregabalin was associated with clinically relevant improvements versus placebo in this difficult-to-treat population.
