Explore the vast range of titles available.

Most totally blind people have non-24-hour sleep–wake disorder (non-24), a rare circadian rhythm disorder caused by an inability of light to reset their circadian pacemaker. In two consecutive placebo-controlled trials (SET and RESET), we assessed safety and efficacy (in terms of circadian entrainment and maintenance) of once-daily tasimelteon, a novel dual-melatonin receptor agonist. We undertook the placebo-controlled, randomised, double-masked trials in 27 US and six German clinical research centres and sleep centres. We screened totally blind adults (18–75 years of age), who were eligible for the randomisation phase of SET if they had a non-24-hour circadian period (τ) of 24·25 h or longer (95% CI greater than 24·0 and up to 24·9 h), as calculated from measurements of urinary 6-sulphatoxymelatonin rhythms. For SET, we used block randomisation to assign patients (1:1) to receive tasimelteon (20 mg) or placebo every 24 h at a fixed clock time 1 h before target bedtime for 26 weeks. Patients who entered the open-label group receiving tasimelteon in SET or who did not meet the SET inclusion criteria but did meet the RESET inclusion criteria were screened for RESET. A subset of the patients who entered the open-label group before the RESET study and who had eligible τ values were screened for RESET after completing the open-label treatment. In RESET, we withdrew tasimelteon in a randomised manner (1:1) in patients who responded (ie, entrained) after a tasimelteon run-in period. Entrainment was defined as having τ of 24·1 h or less and a 95% CI that included 24·0 h. In SET, the primary endpoint was the proportion of entrained patients, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The planned step-down primary endpoint assessed the proportion of patients who had a clinical response (entrainment at month 1 or month 7 plus clinical improvement, measured by the Non-24 Clinical Response Scale). In RESET, the primary endpoint was the proportion of non-entrained patients, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety assessments included adverse events and clinical laboratory measures, assessed in all treated patients. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT01163032 and NCT01430754. Between Aug 25, 2010, and July 5, 2012, we screened 391 totally blind patients for SET, of whom 84 (22%) were assigned to receive tasimelteon (n=42) or placebo (n=42). Two patients in the tasimelteon group and four in the placebo group discontinued the study before τ was measured, due to adverse events, withdrawal of consent, and a protocol deviation. Circadian entrainment occurred in eight (20%) of 40 patients in the tasimelteon group compared with one (3%) of 38 patients in the placebo group at month 1 (difference 17%, 95% CI 3·2–31·6; p=0·0171). Nine (24%) of 38 patients showed a clinical response, compared with none of 34 in the placebo group (difference 24%, 95% CI 8·4–39·0; p=0·0028). Between Sept 15, 2011, and Oct 4, 2012, we screened 58 patients for eligibility in RESET, 48 (83%) of whom had τ assessed and entered the open-label tasimelteon run-in phase. 24 (50%) patients entrained, and 20 (34%) were enrolled in the randomisation phase. Two (20%) of ten patients who were withdrawn to placebo remained entrained compared with nine (90%) of ten who continued to receive tasimelteon (difference 70%, 95% CI 26·4–100·0; p=0·0026). No deaths were reported in either study, and discontinuation rates due to adverse events were comparable between the tasimelteon (3 [6%] of 52 patients) and placebo (2 [4%] of 52 patients) treatment courses. The most common side-effects associated with tasimelteon in SET were headache (7 [17%] of 42 patients given tasimelteon vs 3 [7%] of 42 patients given placebo), elevated liver enzymes (4 [10%] vs 2 [5%]), nightmares or abnormal dreams (4 [10%] vs none), upper respiratory tract infection (3 [7%] vs none], and urinary tract infections (3 [7%] vs 1 [2%]). Once-daily tasimelteon can entrain totally blind people with non-24; however, continued tasimelteon treatment is necessary to maintain these improvements. Vanda Pharmaceuticals.

Circadian rhythm sleep disorders are common causes of insomnia for millions of individuals. We did a phase II study to establish efficacy and physiological mechanism, and a phase III study to confirm efficacy of the melatonin agonist tasimelteon (VEC-162) for treatment of transient insomnia associated with shifted sleep and wake time. We undertook phase II and phase III randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group studies. In a phase II study, 39 healthy individuals from two US sites were randomly assigned to tasimelteon (10 [n=9], 20 [n=8], 50 [n=7], or 100 mg [n=7]) or placebo (n=8). We monitored individuals for 7 nights: 3 at baseline, 3 after a 5-h advance of sleep–wake schedule with treatment before sleep, and 1 after treatment; we measured plasma melatonin concentration for circadian phase assessment. In a phase III study, 411 healthy individuals from 19 US sites, who had transient insomnia induced in a sleep clinic by a 5-h advance of the sleep–wake schedule and a first-night effect in a sleep clinic, were given tasimelteon (20 [n=100], 50 [n=102], or 100 mg [n=106]) or placebo (n=103) 30 min before bedtime. Prespecified primary efficacy outcomes were polysomnographic sleep efficiency (phase II study), latency to persistent sleep (phase III study), and circadian phase shifting (phase II study). Analysis was by intention to treat. Safety was assessed in both studies. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00490945 and NCT00291187. In the phase II study, tasimelteon reduced sleep latency and increased sleep efficiency compared with placebo. The shift in plasma melatonin rhythm to an earlier hour was dose dependent. In the phase III study, tasimelteon improved sleep latency, sleep efficiency, and wake after sleep onset (ie, sleep maintenance). The frequency of adverse events was similar between tasimelteon and placebo. After an abrupt advance in sleep time, tasimelteon improved sleep initiation and maintenance concurrently with a shift in endogenous circadian rhythms. Tasimelteon may have therapeutic potential for transient insomnia in circadian rhythm sleep disorders. Vanda Pharmaceuticals Inc.

To the Editor: Cohen et al. (May 28 issue) 1 describe the interest of the Food and Drug Administration in increasing the availability of naloxone for community use. However, we are confused about the statistics reported in Table 3 of the article. If 4.2%, 1.8%, and 9.7% of the participants had incorrect comprehension of steps 1, 2, and 3, respectively, the worst case (assuming that none of the participants had incorrect comprehension of more than one step) would be a composite percentage of 15.7%. However, the authors report a value of 18.9%. Can they explain this discrepancy? The authors reply: The . . .

Factors such as body size (weight and body mass index [BMI]), age, sex, and race might influence the clinical response to sumatriptan. We evaluated the impact of these covariates on the plasma concentration (Cp) profile of sumatriptan administered subcutaneously. We conducted three pharmacokinetic studies of subcutaneous sumatriptan in 98 healthy adults. Sumatriptan was administered subcutaneously (236 administrations) as either DFN-11 3 mg, a novel 0.5 mL autoinjector being developed by Dr. Reddy's Laboratories; Imitrex(®) (Sumatriptan) injection 3 mg or 6 mg (6 mg/0.5 mL); or Imitrex STATdose 4 mg or 6 mg (0.5 mL). Blood was sampled for 12 hours to determine sumatriptan Cp. Maximum Cp (Cmax), area under the curve during the first 2 hours (AUC0-2), and total area under the curve (AUC0-∞) were determined using noncompartmental methods. Post hoc analyses were conducted to determine the relationship between these exposure metrics and each of body weight, BMI, age, sex, and race (categorized as white, black, or others). Both weight and BMI correlated negatively with each exposure metric for each treatment group. Across all treatment groups, AUC0-2 for subjects with BMI less than or equal to median value was 1.03-1.12 times the value for subjects with BMI more than median value. For subjects with BMI less than or equal to median value receiving DFN-11, median AUC0-2 was slightly less than that for subjects with BMI more than median value receiving Imitrex 4 mg and larger than that for subjects with BMI more than median value receiving Imitrex 3 mg. Results were similar for the other exposure metrics and for weight. Exposure was higher in women than in men, which can be attributed in part to differences in weight. There was no relationship between exposure and age. For DFN-11, AUC0-2 and AUC0-∞ were lower in nonwhites compared with whites; the ratio of median values was 0.84 and 0.89, respectively. A similar, nonstatistically significant, trend was observed in the other products (ratio of median values ranging from 0.84 to 0.89). Weight and BMI appear to be important covariates for sumatriptan exposure: subjects with lower values for either metric of body size have higher systemic exposure compared with subjects with higher values. Additional studies are required to determine if doses of subcutaneous sumatriptan may be adjusted based on BMI for comparable efficacy and a potentially improved tolerability profile.

IGF-1 is often used as a biomarker to evaluate the efficacy and safety of hGH replacement therapy. Typically, the mean IGF-1 SDS level during the dosing interval, rather than the peak value, guides clinical decision-making: sustained mean values > +2 may require hGH dose modifications. With long-acting formulations (administered weekly), the IGF-1 evaluation paradigm needs to take into account when the sample was obtained relative to the last administered dose. Previous studies with OPKO’s once weekly Somatrogon (hGH-CTP), demonstrated that IGF-1 SDS peaked ~ 48 hours post-dose and that values at ~ 96 hours best approximated the mean IGF-1 SDS throughout the dosing interval [1]. Data from the pivotal Phase 3 non-inferiority study comparing treatment with Somatrogon to Genotropin allowed further evaluation of the IGF-1 SDS analysis paradigm. Enrolled subjects were randomized to receive treatment with either once weekly Somatrogon (0.66 mg/kg; N=109) or once daily Genotropin (0.034 mg/kg; N=115). IGF1 was sampled ~ five times during 52 weeks of treatment with Somatrogon, providing a total of 557 samples obtained after the first dose of Somatrogon. IGF-1 SDS values were calculated using Bidlingmaier’s equations [2]. Analysis of IGF-I SDS data from the Phase 3 study showed that the previously-developed model, with adjustments to two parameters (baseline IGF-1, EC50) and adapted to fit IGF-1 values in the absence of Somatrogon concentration data, fit the IGF-1 data for Somatrogon with minimal bias. This allowed prediction of IGF-1 SDS values at timepoints throughout the dosing interval as well as calculation of the mean value during a dosing interval. Of the samples obtained between 48–72 hours post-dose (representing peak IGF-1 SDS), approximately 17% had an IGF1 SDS > +2. At 96 hours (corresponding to mean IFG-1 SDS), fewer than 2% of modeled values were > +2. Mean IGF-1 SDS over the dosing interval was between -1 and +1 for all subjects. These findings indicate that IGF-1 SDS values need to be interpreted in the context of when the sample was obtained relative to the last dose of Somatrogon. Our results indicate that samples obtained 96 hours post-dose best represent mean IGF-1 levels and that values obtained between 48–72 hours post-dose represent values closer to peak IGF-1 concentrations. In our Phase 3 study, of the 557 samples collected from 114 patients during the 12-month Somatrogon treatment period, fewer than 2% of the corresponding values at 96 hours postdose (estimated from a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model) had IGF-1 SDS levels > +2. 1. Fisher DM, et al. Horm Res Paediatr 2017;87:324. 2. Bidlingmaier M, et al. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2014;99:1712

Jan. 17--The Rev. Rod Parsley's World Harvest Church and two affiliates always have obeyed federal tax laws, and an accusation to the contrary by 31 area pastors is \"baseless and without merit,\" World Harvest said yesterday. The 31 complained to the Internal Revenue Service on Sunday, accusing the church, its Center for Moral Clarity and a related group, Reformation Ohio, of violating IRS regulations by engaging in partisan politics. They asked for an IRS investigation of the three as well as two allied entities, Fairfield Christian Church of Lancaster and the Ohio Restoration Project. The complainants want the IRS to investigate whether Parsley and the pastor of Fairfield Christian, the Rev. Russell Johnson, have used their churches and affiliated organizations to promote the gubernatorial candidacy of Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell.

The American Cancer Society Head and Neck Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline was developed to assist primary care clinicians and other health practitioners with the care of head and neck cancer survivors, including monitoring for recurrence, screening for second primary cancers, assessment and management of long-term and late effects, health promotion, and care coordination. A systematic review of the literature was conducted using PubMed through April 2015, and a multidisciplinary expert workgroup with expertise in primary care, dentistry, surgical oncology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, clinical psychology, speech-language pathology, physical medicine and rehabilitation, the patient perspective, and nursing was assembled. While the guideline is based on a systematic review of the current literature, most evidence is not sufficient to warrant a strong recommendation. Therefore, recommendations should be viewed as consensus-based management strategies for assisting patients with physical and psychosocial effects of head and neck cancer and its treatment.

Recognized as an outstanding educational product by the 2001 NASA Earth Science Enterprise Education Product Peer Review \"The purpose of this textbook on global ecosystem change and human health is twofold: (1) to raise awareness of changes in human health related to global ecosystem change and (2) to expand the scope of the traditional curriculum in environmental health to include the interactions of major environmental forces and public health on a global scale.\"—from the Introduction Ecosystem Change and Public Health focuses on how human health is affected by global ecosystem changes. It is the first textbook devoted to this emerging field, offering a global perspective on research methods and emphasizing empirical investigations of health outcomes in combination with integrated assessment for policy development. The book covers such topics as global climate change, stratospheric ozone depletion, water resources management, and ecology and infectious disease. Case studies of cholera, malaria, the effects of water resources, and global climate change and air pollution illustrate the analysis and methodology. The book also includes a resource center describing places to start searches on the World Wide Web, guidelines for finding and evaluating information, suggested study projects, and strategies for encouraging communication among course participants.

Land use is central to addressing sustainability issues, including biodiversity conservation, climate change, food security, poverty alleviation, and sustainable energy. In this paper, we synthesize knowledge accumulated in land system science, the integrated study of terrestrial social-ecological systems, into 10 hard truths that have strong, general, empirical support. These facts help to explain the challenges of achieving sustainability in land use and thus also point toward solutions. The 10 facts are as follows: 1) Meanings and values of land are socially constructed and contested; 2) land systems exhibit complex behaviors with abrupt, hard-to-predict changes; 3) irreversible changes and path dependence are common features of land systems; 4) some land uses have a small footprint but very large impacts; 5) drivers and impacts of land-use change are globally interconnected and spill over to distant locations; 6) humanity lives on a used planet where all land provides benefits to societies; 7) land-use change usually entails trade-offs between different benefits—“win–wins” are thus rare; 8) land tenure and land-use claims are often unclear, overlapping, and contested; 9) the benefits and burdens from land are unequally distributed; and 10) land users have multiple, sometimes conflicting, ideas of what social and environmental justice entails. The facts have implications for governance, but do not provide fixed answers. Instead they constitute a set of core principles which can guide scientists, policy makers, and practitioners toward meeting sustainability challenges in land use.