Explore the vast range of titles available.

About one-third of patients with depression fail to achieve remission despite treatment with multiple antidepressants and are considered to have treatment-resistant depression. This Phase 3, double-blind, multicenter study enrolled adults with moderate-to-severe depression and nonresponse to ≥2 antidepressants in the current depression episode. Eligible patients (N = 346) were randomized (1:1:1) to twice-weekly nasal spray treatment (esketamine [56 or 84 mg] or placebo) plus a newly initiated, open-label, oral antidepressant taken daily for 4 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline to day 28 in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale total score, performed by blinded, remote raters. Based on the predefined statistical testing sequence, esketamine 84 mg/antidepressant had to be significant for esketamine 56 mg/antidepressant to be formally tested. Statistical significance was not achieved with esketamine 84 mg/antidepressant compared with antidepressant/placebo (least squares [LS] means difference [95% CI]: -3.2 [-6.88, 0.45]; 2-sided P value = .088). Although esketamine 56 mg/antidepressant could not be formally tested, the LS means difference was -4.1 [-7.67, -0.49] (nominal 2-sided P value = .027). The most common (>20%) adverse events reported for esketamine/antidepressant were nausea, dissociation, dizziness, vertigo, and headache. Statistical significance was not achieved for the primary endpoint; nevertheless, the treatment effect (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale) for both esketamine/antidepressant groups exceeded what has been considered clinically meaningful for approved antidepressants vs placebo. Safety was similar between esketamine/antidepressant groups and no new dose-related safety concerns were identified. This study provides supportive evidence for the safety and efficacy of esketamine nasal spray as a new, rapid-acting antidepressant for patients with treatment-resistant depression. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02417064.

Triamcinolone acetonide extended-release (ER) 32 mg (Zilretta ® ) is approved in the USA for the management of osteoarthritis (OA) pain of the knee and is administered as a single, 5 mL intra-articular (IA) injection. Although the therapeutic effects from IA corticosteroids are typically short-lived, triamcinolone acetonide ER is formulated in poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) microspheres that slowly release triamcinolone acetonide in the synovium, enabling their prolonged presence in the joint. This reduces systemic exposure and lessens corticosteroid-related systemic adverse reactions, such as blood glucose elevations. In a 24-week, randomized, phase III clinical trial, triamcinolone acetonide ER 32 mg significantly improved mean average daily pain intensity in patients with knee OA relative to placebo, and pain, stiffness and physical function (according to WOMAC criteria) relative to placebo and triamcinolone acetonide crystalline suspension (CS). Triamcinolone acetonide ER was generally well tolerated, with a tolerability profile similar to that of triamcinolone acetonide CS and placebo. Findings from a single-arm phase IIIb study indicated that a repeat administration of triamcinolone acetonide ER may be similarly efficacious to an initial injection without having deleterious effects on cartilage or other aspects of joint structure. Thus, triamcinolone acetonide ER expands the treatment options available for the management of OA pain of the knee.

Background:This double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter, phase-3 study was designed to test the noninferiority of paliperidone palmitate 3-month formulation (PP3M) to the currently marketed 1-month formulation (PP1M) in patients (age 18–70 years) with schizophrenia, previously stabilized on PP1M.Methods:After screening (≤3 weeks) and a 17-week, flexible-dosed, open-label phase (PP1M: day 1 [150mg eq. deltoid], day 8 [100mg eq. deltoid.], weeks 5, 9, and 13 [50, 75, 100, or 150mg eq., deltoid/gluteal]), clinically stable patients were randomized (1:1) to PP3M (fixed-dose, 175, 263, 350, or 525mg eq. deltoid/gluteal) or PP1M (fixed-dose, 50, 75, 100, or 150mg eq. deltoid/gluteal) for a 48-week double-blind phase.Results:Overall, 1016/1429 open-label patients entered the double-blind phase (PP3M: n=504; PP1M: n=512) and 842 completed it (including patients with relapse). PP3M was noninferior to PP1M: relapse rates were similar in both groups (PP3M: n=37, 8%; PP1M: n=45, 9%; difference in relapse-free rate: 1.2% [95% CI:-2.7%; 5.1%]) based on Kaplan-Meier estimates (primary efficacy). Secondary endpoint results (changes from double-blind baseline in positive and negative symptom score total and subscale scores, Clinical Global Impression-Severity, and Personal and Social Performance scores) were consistent with primary endpoint results. No clinically relevant differences were observed in pharmacokinetic exposures between PP3M and PP1M. Both groups had similar tolerability profiles; increased weight was the most common treatment-emergent adverse event (double-blind phase; 21% each). No new safety signals were detected.Conclusion:Taken together, PP3M with its 3-month dosing interval is a unique option for relapse prevention in schizophrenia.

Background and objective Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder is a neurodevelopmental disorder that typically begins in childhood and often persists into adulthood. Recent phase III trials have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of viloxazine extended-release capsules (viloxazine ER; Qelbree ® ) in pediatrics (6–17 years of age). The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of viloxazine ER in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Methods This was a phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-arm trial in adults (18–65 years of age) with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Eligible subjects were randomized 1:1 to viloxazine ER (flexible dose of 200–600 mg/day) or matched placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline at end of study (week 6) in the Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale (AISRS) total score. The key secondary endpoint was the change from baseline at end of study in the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) score. Additional secondary outcome measures included the AISRS Inattention and Hyperactivity/Impulsivity subscales, the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Adult (BRIEF-A), the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 Item (GAD-7), and the Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I); each was analyzed at end of study. Responder rates on CGI scales and the AISRS were also assessed. Results A total of 374 subjects were randomized. At end of study, the mean viloxazine ER dose was 504 mg. The reduction in the change from baseline at end of study AISRS total score (least-square means ± standard error) was significantly greater in subjects treated with viloxazine ER (−15.5 ± 0.91) compared with placebo (−11.7 ± 0.90), p = 0.0040. The reduction in the CGI-S score was also significantly greater in subjects treated with viloxazine ER (−1.4 ± 0.10) compared with placebo (−1.0 ± 0.10), p = 0.0023. The viloxazine ER group demonstrated significantly greater improvements in the AISRS Inattention ( p = 0.0015) and Hyperactivity/Impulsivity ( p = 0.0380) subscales, the CGI-I ( p = 0.0076), and the BRIEF-A Global Executive Composite ( p = 0.0468) and Metacognition Index ( p = 0.0100). Analysis of categorical secondary endpoints revealed that the viloxazine ER group had a significantly higher AISRS 30% response rate compared with placebo ( p = 0.0395); all other comparisons were not significant. Many treatment effects (including the primary and key secondary endpoints) were significant by week 2. The most common treatment-related adverse events that occurred in ≥5% of subjects receiving viloxazine ER were insomnia (14.8%), fatigue (11.6%), nausea (10.1%), decreased appetite (10.1%), dry mouth (9.0%), and headache (9.0%). Viloxazine ER was well tolerated, with a 9.0% discontinuation rate due to adverse events compared with 4.9% in the placebo group. Conclusions Treatment with viloxazine ER resulted in a statistically significant improvement in primary and key secondary endpoints, indicating improvements in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptomology, executive function, and overall clinical illness severity in adults. Viloxazine ER was well tolerated at the tested doses in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Clinical Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04016779. Plain Language Summary Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a condition characterized by inattention (difficulty maintaining focus), and/or impulsiveness/hyperactivity. In 2021, a nonstimulant medication called viloxazine ER (brand name: Qelbree ® ) received US FDA-approval for ADHD in children and adolescents (aged 6 to 17 years), based on efficacy and safety demonstrated in clinical trials. Here we present results of a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial that enrolled 374 adults with ADHD. In this trial, half the patients received viloxazine ER, and half received placebo (identical capsule without active ingredient). Medication doses ranged from 200–600 mg/day, based on symptom response and presence of side effects. To reduce bias, patients and investigators did not know which medication the patient was receiving. The primary measure of efficacy was the Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale (AISRS), a standardized questionnaire rating presence and severity of patient-reported ADHD symptoms. At the end of the 6-week trial, participants receiving viloxazine ER showed greater improvement in ADHD symptoms according to AISRS than those receiving placebo. Improvement was seen in both the Inattentive and Impulsive/Hyperactive components of ADHD and in other study measures, including a measure of behaviors called Executive Function. Viloxazine ER was generally safe and well-tolerated in the trial. The most common side effects were insomnia (14.8%), fatigue (11.6%), and nausea (10.1%). Overall, 9.0% of patients receiving viloxazine and 5% receiving placebo left the trial because of side effects. Due to these positive results, the US FDA recently approved viloxazine ER to treat adults with ADHD.

Cognitive deficits at the first episode of schizophrenia are predictive of functional outcome. Interventions that improve cognitive functioning early in schizophrenia are critical if we hope to prevent or limit long-term disability in this disorder. We completed a 12-month randomized controlled trial of cognitive remediation and of long-acting injectable (LAI) risperidone with 60 patients with a recent first episode of schizophrenia. Cognitive remediation involved programs focused on basic cognitive processes as well as more complex, life-like situations. Healthy behavior training of equal treatment time was the comparison group for cognitive remediation, while oral risperidone was the comparator for LAI risperidone in a 2 × 2 design. All patients were provided supported employment/education to encourage return to work or school. Both antipsychotic medication adherence and cognitive remediation contributed to cognitive improvement. Cognitive remediation was superior to healthy behavior training in the LAI medication condition but not the oral medication condition. Cognitive remediation was also superior when medication adherence and protocol completion were covaried. Both LAI antipsychotic medication and cognitive remediation led to significantly greater improvement in work/school functioning. Effect sizes were larger than in most prior studies of first-episode patients. In addition, cognitive improvement was significantly correlated with work/school functional improvement. These results indicate that consistent antipsychotic medication adherence and cognitive remediation can significantly improve core cognitive deficits in the initial period of schizophrenia. When combined with supported employment/education, cognitive remediation and LAI antipsychotic medication show separate significant impact on improving work/school functioning.

Background Aripiprazole 2-month ready-to-use 960 mg (Ari 2MRTU 960) is a new long-acting injectable antipsychotic formulation for gluteal administration every 2 months, currently being investigated for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar I disorder (BP-I). The objectives of this trial were to evaluate the safety and tolerability of Ari 2MRTU 960, and the similarity of aripiprazole plasma concentrations following administration of Ari 2MRTU 960 or aripiprazole once-monthly 400 mg (AOM 400), in adults with schizophrenia or BP-I. Methods This was a 32-week open-label study. Eligible participants were randomized 1:1 to receive Ari 2MRTU 960 every 56 ± 2 days (four injections scheduled) or AOM 400 every 28 ± 2 days (eight injections scheduled). Participants received overlapping oral antipsychotic treatment with the first administration of study drug (there was no oral overlap for participants stabilized on AOM 400). Safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics (PK) were evaluated throughout the study. Primary safety endpoints included reported adverse events, injection site reactions, and extrapyramidal symptoms. Primary PK endpoints were plasma concentration of aripiprazole 56 days after the fourth dose of Ari 2MRTU 960 and 28 days after the eighth dose of AOM 400, and area under the concentration–time curve (AUC) from Day 0 to 56 postdose after the fourth dose of Ari 2MRTU 960, or AUC from Day 0 to 28 after the seventh and eighth doses of AOM 400. Results Of the 266 participants enrolled (schizophrenia, n  = 185; BP-I, n  = 81), 132 were randomized to receive Ari 2MRTU 960 and 134 were randomized to receive AOM 400. The majority (66.2%) of participants were male; 72.9% were Black or African American, and mean age was 47.3 years; demographic characteristics and baseline disease characteristics were generally well balanced between groups. Study completion rate was 77.3% in the Ari 2MRTU 960 group and 68.7% in the AOM 400 group. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was similar between Ari 2MRTU 960 (71.2%) and AOM 400 (70.9%). The most frequently reported TEAEs were increased weight (Ari 2MRTU 960: 22.7%; AOM 400: 20.9%) and injection-site pain (Ari 2MRTU 960: 18.2%; AOM 400: 9.0%). The geometric means ratio (GMR) of aripiprazole plasma concentrations on the last day following the final dosing for Ari 2MRTU 960 versus AOM 400 was 1.011 (90% confidence interval [CI] 0.893–1.145), and the GMR of aripiprazole plasma exposure (area under the concentration–time curve) over the fourth Ari 2MRTU 960 dosing interval versus the seventh and eighth AOM 400 dosing intervals was 1.006 (90% CI 0.851–1.190). Conclusions Ari 2MRTU 960 was generally well tolerated in adults with schizophrenia or BP-I, with a safety profile comparable with that of AOM 400, and aripiprazole exposure equivalent to that with AOM 400 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04030143, registered on 23 July 2019). Plain Language Summary Aripiprazole is a medication used to treat psychotic symptoms in schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder (BP-I) that can be taken orally or injected into the muscle. Aripiprazole once-monthly 400 mg (AOM 400) is a long-acting injectable formulation administered every 28 days, used in the treatment of schizophrenia or BP-I. A new 2-month ready-to-use formulation containing 960 mg of aripiprazole (Ari 2MRTU 960) is currently being investigated for the treatment of schizophrenia or BP-I. This 32-week study compared Ari 2MRTU 960 with AOM 400 in adults with schizophrenia or BP-I stabilized on their current medication. Study participants were randomly assigned to receive either Ari 2MRTU 960 every 56 ± 2 days (four injections scheduled in total) or AOM 400 every 28 ± 2 days (eight injections scheduled in total). Safety, tolerability, and concentration of aripiprazole in the blood were evaluated throughout the study. The incidence of adverse events emerging during the treatment period was similar between Ari 2MRTU 960 and AOM 400 (71.2% and 70.9%, respectively), with the most frequently reported events being increased weight (Ari 2MRTU 960: 22.7%; AOM 400: 20.9%) and injection-site pain (Ari 2MRTU 960: 18.2%; AOM 400: 9.0%). At the end of the study, aripiprazole concentrations were similar between treatment groups, based on the reported pharmacokinetic parameters. Participants remained clinically stable throughout the study. Ari 2MRTU 960 was generally well tolerated in adults with schizophrenia or BP-I.

Pancreatic-enzyme replacement therapy (PERT) is the standard of care to prevent maldigestion, malnutrition, and excessive weight loss in patients with exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI) due to chronic pancreatitis (CP) or pancreatic surgery (PS). Our objective was to assess the efficacy and safety of a new formulation of pancrelipase (pancreatin) delayed-release 12,000-lipase unit capsules (CREON) in patients with EPI due to CP or PS. This was a double-blind, randomized, multicountry, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial enrolling patients ≥18 years old with confirmed EPI due to CP or PS conducted in clinical research centers or hospitals. After a 5-day placebo run-in period (baseline), patients were randomized to pancrelipase (72,000 lipase units per meal; 36,000 per snack) or placebo for 7 days. All patients received an individually designed diet to provide at least 100 g of fat per day. The primary efficacy measure was the change in coefficient of fat absorption (CFA) from baseline to end of the double-blind period, analyzed using non-parametric analysis of covariance. Secondary outcomes included the coefficient of nitrogen absorption (CNA), clinical symptoms, and safety parameters. In total, 25 patients (median age of 54 years, 76% male) received pancrelipase and 29 patients (median age of 50 years, 69% male) received placebo. Th e mean ± s.d. change from baseline in CFA was significantly greater with pancrelipase vs. placebo: 31.9 ± 18.6 vs. 8.7 ± 12.4 % ( P < 0.0001) [corrected]. Similarly, the mean ± s.d. change from baseline in CNA was greater for pancrelipase vs. placebo: 35.2 ± 29.1 vs. 8.9 ± 28.0 % ( P = 0.0005) [corrected].Greater improvements from baseline in stool frequency, stool consistency, abdominal pain, and flatulence were observed with pancrelipase vs. placebo. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in five patients (20.0%) in the pancrelipase group and in six (20.7%) in the placebo group; the most common were gastrointestinal (GI) events and metabolism/nutrition disorders. There were no treatment discontinuations due to TEAEs. Pancrelipase delayed-release 12,000-lipase unit capsules were effective in treating fat and nitrogen maldigestion with a TEAE rate similar to that of placebo in patients with EPI due to CP or PS.

Research has shown that 20-30% of prisoners meet the diagnostic criteria for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methylphenidate reduces ADHD symptoms, but effects in prisoners are uncertain because of comorbid mental health and substance use disorders. To estimate the efficacy of an osmotic-release oral system methylphenidate (OROS-methylphenidate) in reducing ADHD symptoms in young adult prisoners with ADHD. We conducted an 8-week parallel-arm, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial of OROS-methylphenidate versus placebo in male prisoners (aged 16-25 years) meeting the DSM-5 criteria for ADHD. Primary outcome was ADHD symptoms at 8 weeks, using the investigator-rated Connors Adult ADHD Rating Scale (CAARS-O). Thirteen secondary outcomes were measured, including emotional dysregulation, mind wandering, violent attitudes, mental health symptoms, and prison officer and educational staff ratings of behaviour and aggression. In the OROS-methylphenidate arm, mean CAARS-O score at 8 weeks was estimated to be reduced by 0.57 points relative to the placebo arm (95% CI -2.41 to 3.56), and non-significant. The responder rate, defined as a 20% reduction in CAARS-O score, was 48.3% for the OROS-methylphenidate arm and 47.9% for the placebo arm. No statistically significant trial arm differences were detected for any of the secondary outcomes. Mean final titrated dose was 53.8 mg in the OROS-methylphenidate arm. ADHD symptoms did not respond to OROS-methylphenidate in young adult prisoners. The findings do not support routine treatment with OROS-methylphenidate in this population. Further research is needed to evaluate effects of higher average dosing and adherence to treatment, multi-modal treatments and preventative interventions in the community.

Abstract Context Oral once-daily dual-release hydrocortisone (DR-HC) replacement therapy has demonstrated an improved metabolic profile compared to conventional 3-times-daily (TID-HC) therapy among patients with primary adrenal insufficiency. This effect might be related to a more physiological cortisol profile, but also to a modified pattern of cortisol metabolism. Objective This work aimed to study cortisol metabolism during DR-HC and TID-HC. Design A randomized, 12-week, crossover study was conducted. Intervention and Participants DC-HC and same daily dose of TID-HC were administered to patients with primary adrenal insufficiency (n = 50) vs healthy individuals (n = 124) as controls. Main Outcome Measures Urinary corticosteroid metabolites were measured by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry at 24-hour urinary collections. Results Total cortisol metabolites decreased during DR-HC compared to TID-HC (P < .001) and reached control values (P = .089). During DR-HC, 11β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 1 (11β-HSD1) activity measured by tetrahydrocortisol + 5α-tetrahydrocortisol/tetrahydrocortisone ratio was reduced compared to TID-HC (P < .05), but remained increased vs controls (P < .001). 11β-HSD2 activity measured by urinary free cortisone/free cortisol ratio was decreased with TID-HC vs controls (P < .01) but normalized with DR-HC (P = .358). 5α- and 5β-reduced metabolites were decreased with DR-HC compared to TID-HC. Tetrahydrocortisol/5α-tetrahydrocortisol ratio was increased during both treatments, suggesting increased 5β-reductase activity. Conclusions The urinary cortisol metabolome shows striking abnormalities in patients receiving conventional TID-HC replacement therapy, with increased 11β-HSD1 activity that may account for the unfavorable metabolic phenotype in primary adrenal insufficiency. Its change toward normalization with DR-HC may mediate beneficial metabolic effects. The urinary cortisol metabolome may serve as a tool to assess optimal cortisol replacement therapy.

Purpose We investigated whether twice-daily administration of a bilayer tablet formulation of tramadol (35% immediate-release [IR] and 65% sustained-release) is as effective as four-times-daily IR tramadol capsules for managing cancer pain. Methods This randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-comparator, non-inferiority study enrolled opioid-naïve patients using non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or acetaminophen (paracetamol) to manage cancer pain and self-reported pain (mean value over 3 days ≥ 25 mm on a 100-mm visual analog scale [VAS]). Patients were randomized to either bilayer tablets or IR capsules for 14 days. The starting dose was 100 mg/day and could be escalated to 300 mg/day. The primary endpoint was the change in VAS (averaged over 3 days) for pain at rest from baseline to end of treatment/discontinuation. Results Overall, 251 patients were randomized. The baseline mean VAS at rest was 47.67 mm (range: 25.6–82.7 mm). In the full analysis set, the adjusted mean change in VAS was − 22.07 and − 19.08 mm in the bilayer tablet (n = 124) and IR capsule (n = 120) groups, respectively. The adjusted mean difference was − 2.99 mm (95% confidence interval [CI] − 7.96 to 1.99 mm). The upper 95% CI was less than the predefined non-inferiority margin of 7.5 mm. Other efficacy outcomes were similar in both groups. Adverse events were reported for 97/126 (77.0%) and 101/125 (80.8%) patients in the bilayer tablet and IR capsule groups, respectively. Conclusion Twice-daily administration of bilayer tramadol tablets was as effective as four-times-daily administration of IR capsules regarding the improvement in pain VAS, with comparable safety outcomes. Clinical trial registration JapicCTI-184143/jRCT2080224082 (October 5, 2018).