Quality of life outcomes in adults with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis treated with dimethylfumarate (DMF): a post hoc analysis of the BRIDGE study

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory skin disease associated with quality of life (QoL) impairment. BRIDGE was a randomized, double-blind, phase III study comparing the efficacy and safety of dimethylfumarate (DMF) with a fixed combination of fumaric acid esters (FAE) or placebo for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis.

OBJECTIVES

This post hoc analysis investigated treatment effect on QoL overall and by patient subgroups categorized by disease severity. Week 8 efficacy responses were also investigated as possible predictors of Week 16 Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) outcomes.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to receive a maximum daily dose of 720 mg of DMF, FAE (gradual up-titration) or placebo for 16 weeks. Psoriasis Area Severity Index, Body Surface Area, Physician's Global Assessment and DLQI were assessed at baseline, Weeks 8 and 16. DLQI 0-1 indicated 'no effect on patient life'. Associations between baseline severity, Week 16 DLQI and Week 8 efficacy (as observed cases) were also examined.

RESULTS

At baseline, 671 patients were included in the full analysis set (267 randomized to DMF, 273 to FAE and 131 to placebo). DMF was superior to placebo (P < 0.001) and not significantly different to FAE regarding Week 16 DLQI outcomes (P > 0.05). Baseline disease severity did not impact DLQI outcomes at Week 16. In DMF- and FAE-treated patients, Week 8 PASI 50/75 responders reported better DLQI responses at Week 16 vs non-responders (P < 0.05). Week 8 PASI ≤ 3 and/or PGA 0-1 responders were also more likely to report DLQI 0-1 at Week 16 vs non-responders (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Dimethylfumarate significantly improved DLQI outcomes vs. placebo and was not affected by baseline disease severity. Efficacy responses (PASI 50/75, PASI ≤3 and PGA 0-1) as early as Week 8 were predictive of QoL outcomes at Week 16 in DMF- and FAE-treated patients.

Randomised clinical trials: linaclotide phase 3 studies in IBS-C - a prespecified further analysis based on European Medicines Agency-specified endpoints

BACKGROUND

Treatment options that improve overall symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C) are lacking.

AIM

A prespecified further analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of linaclotide, a guanylate cyclase C agonist, in patients with IBS-C, based on efficacy parameters prespecified for European Medicines Agency (EMA) submission.

METHODS

Two randomised, double-blind, multicentre Phase 3 trials investigated once-daily linaclotide (290 μg) for 12 weeks (Trial 31) or 26 weeks (Trial 302) in patients with IBS-C. Prespecified primary endpoints were the EMA-recommended co-primary endpoints: (i) 12-week abdominal pain/discomfort responders [≥30% reduction in mean abdominal pain and/or discomfort score (11-point scales), with neither worsening from baseline, for ≥6 weeks] and (ii) 12-week IBS degree-of-relief responders (symptoms 'considerably' or 'completely' relieved for ≥6 weeks).

RESULTS

Overall, 803 (Trial 31) and 805 patients (Trial 302) were randomised. A significantly greater proportion of linaclotide-treated vs. placebo-treated patients were 12-week abdominal pain/discomfort responders (Trial 31: 54.8% vs. 41.8%; Trial 302: 54.1% vs. 38.5%; P < 0.001) and IBS degree-of-relief responders (Trial 31: 37.0% vs. 18.5%; Trial 302: 39.4% vs. 16.6%; P < 0.0001). Similarly, significantly more linaclotide- vs. placebo-treated patients were responders for ≥13 weeks in Trial 302 (abdominal pain/discomfort: 53.6% vs. 36.0%; IBS degree-of-relief: 37.2% vs. 16.9%; P < 0.0001). The proportion of sustained responders (co-primary endpoint responders plus responders for ≥2 of the last 4 weeks of treatment) was also significantly greater with linaclotide vs. placebo in both trials (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Linaclotide treatment significantly improved abdominal pain/discomfort and degree-of-relief of IBS-C symptoms compared with placebo over 12 and 26 weeks.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (identifiers: NCT00948818 and NCT00938717).

Peak inspiratory flow through the Genuair inhaler in patients with moderate or severe COPD

The Genuair inhaler is a new multidose dry powder inhaler for the delivery of aclidinium bromide - a novel, long-acting, muscarinic antagonist in development for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The primary aim of this study was to assess the inspiratory flow characteristics through Genuair in patients with moderate or severe COPD. Using a three-period cross-over design, 48 patients were randomised to inhale placebo powder through Genuair, HandiHaler A (slow, deep inhalation as per manufacturer's instructions) or HandiHaler B (fast, forceful inhalation). Three measurements of peak inspiratory flow (PIF), 10min apart, were recorded for each method of administration. The highest and average PIFs for the three attempts (mean+/-standard deviation) generated through the Genuair inhaler were 97.7+/-15.7 and 92.0+/-15.4L/min, respectively. Furthermore, 97% of inhalations with the Genuair inhaler were successful (activation of trigger threshold mechanism) and optimal (PIF> or =45L/min). The highest and average PIFs generated through HandiHaler A and B were significantly lower than with the Genuair inhaler. In conclusion, patients with moderate or severe COPD were able to generate sufficient inspiratory airflow through the Genuair inhaler to reliably inhale the full dose and reset the inhaler.

Early vs. Non-Early Intervention in Acute Migraine — ‘Act When Mild (AwM)’. A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Almotriptan

The study was designed to compare the response to almotriptan in migraine patients who take medication early in the course of the attack with that when medication is taken after pain has become moderate or severe. A randomized, four-arm, multicentre, multinational, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of almotriptan (12.5 mg) comparing treatment administration when pain intensity was mild and within 1 h of headache onset vs. pain that had become moderate or severe was conducted. Of 491 migraineurs enrolled, 403 were evaluable [intention-to-treat population (ITT)]. Their mean age was 38 years, 84% were female and they had a mean of 3.7 attacks/month. Of these patients, 10% did not take medication according to their randomly allocated basal pain intensity (mild or moderate/severe) and were subsequently reassigned to that group for this analysis —'Act when Mild (AwM)' group. In the almotriptan arms, 53% of mild basal pain and 38% of moderate/severe basal pain patients were pain free at 2 h ( P = 0.03; primary end-point). Corresponding proportions in the placebo groups were 25% and 17% (statistically significant vs. respective almotriptan arms). Secondary end-points (ITT) were also significantly in favour of early intervention with almotriptan, both between and across treatment groups, such as sustained pain free: 45.6% vs. 30.5% ( P = 0.02). Adverse events were reported in < 5% of treated patients in all groups (NS), with no serious events. Treatment with almotriptan while migraine pain is still mild provides statistically significant and clinically relevant enhancements in efficacy compared with treatment when pain has reached higher severity levels.