Vorapaxar in the Secondary Prevention of Atherothrombotic Events

BACKGROUND Thrombin potently activates platelets through the protease-activated receptor PAR-1. Vorapaxar is a novel antiplatelet agent that selectively inhibits the cellular actions of thrombin through antagonism of PAR-1. METHODS We randomly assigned 26,449 patients who had a history of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or peripheral arterial disease to receive vorapaxar (2.5 mg daily) or matching placebo and followed them for a median of 30 months. The primary efficacy end point was the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke. After 2 years, the data and safety monitoring board recommended discontinuation of the study treatment in patients with a history of stroke owing to the risk of intracranial hemorrhage. RESULTS At 3 years, the primary end point had occurred in 1028 patients (9.3%) in the vorapaxar group and in 1176 patients (10.5%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio for the vorapaxar group, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 0.94; P<0.001). Cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or recurrent ischemia leading to revascularization occurred in 1259 patients (11.2%) in the vorapaxar group and 1417 patients (12.4%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.95; P=0.001). Moderate or severe bleeding occurred in 4.2% of patients who received vorapaxar and 2.5% of those who received placebo (hazard ratio, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.43 to 1.93; P<0.001). There was an increase in the rate of intracranial hemorrhage in the vorapaxar group (1.0%, vs. 0.5% in the placebo group; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS Inhibition of PAR-1 with vorapaxar reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or ischemic events in patients with stable atherosclerosis who were receiving standard therapy. However, it increased the risk of moderate or severe bleeding, including intracranial hemorrhage. (Funded by Merck; TRA 2P-TIMI 50 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00526474.)

Nebulized 0.5, 2.5 and 5 ml L-epinephrine for post-extubation stridor in children: a prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial

Nebulized l-epinephrine has been recommended for the treatment of viral croup. However, the few studies assessing its effect on post-extubation stridor (PES) have shown conflicting results. We compared the efficacy and safety of nebulized l-epinephrine at three different doses for the treatment of PES. We conducted a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial including all consecutive children with a PES score of a parts per thousand yen4 (Westley score). The primary efficacy outcome was change in PES score at 40 min. A reduction of a parts per thousand yen2 points in stridor score was defined as clinically significant. A total of 96 patients were randomly assigned to receive one of three doses of nebulized l-epinephrine upon achieving a PES score of 4 or more following extubation. Stridor score and vital signs were recorded before treatment, and at 20, 40, 60 and 180 min after nebulization. Baseline characteristics were similar among all study groups. No significant difference was detected among the treatments based on change in Westley score by intent-to-treat analysis. In addition, the difference in the number of patients who clinically improved among the treatment groups was not significant (p = 0.54). Patients receiving 5 ml nebulized epinephrine had a significant increase of systolic and diastolic blood pressure at 40 and 180 min. Nebulized l-epinephrine at doses of 0.5, 2.5 and 5 ml demonstrated a lack of dose response in effect on PES and a modestly clinically significant increase in undesired side effects (heart rate and blood pressure) at higher doses.

Pimavanserin, a selective serotonin (5-HT)2A-inverse agonist, enhances the efficacy and safety of risperidone, 2 mg/day, but does not enhance efficacy of haloperidol, 2 mg/day: Comparison with reference dose risperidone, 6 mg/day

Most atypical antipsychotic drugs (APDs), e. g. risperidone (RIS), produce more extensive blockade of brain serotonin (5-HT)(2A) than dopamine (DA) D-2 receptors. This distinguishes them from typical APDs, e.g. haloperidol (HAL). Our objective was to test the hypothesis that augmentation of low doses of RIS or HAL (2 mg/day) with pimavanserin (PIM), a selective 5-HT2A inverse agonist, to enhance 5-HT2A receptor blockade, can achieve efficacy comparable to RIS, 6 mg/day, but with lesser side effects. In a multi-center, randomized, double-blind, 6 week trial, 423 patients with chronic schizophrenia experiencing a recent exacerbation of psychotic symptoms were randomized to RIS2mg + placebo (RIS2PBO), RIS2mg + PIM20mg (RIS2PIM), RIS6mg + PBO (RIS6PBO), HAL2mg + PBO (HAL2PBO), or HAL2mg + PIM20mg (HAL2PIM). Improvement in psychopathology was measured by the PANSS and CGI-S. The reduction in PANSS Total Score with RIS2PIM at endpoint was significantly greater than RIS2PBO: -23.0 vs. -16.3 (p = 0.007), and not significantly different from the RIS6PBO group: -23.2 points. The percentage of patients with >= 20% improvement at day 15 in the RIS2PIM group was 62.3%, significantly greater than the RIS6PBO (42.1%; p = 0.01) and the RIS2PBO groups (37.7%; p = 0.002). Weight gain and hyperprolactinemia were greater in the RIS6PBO group than the RIS2PIM group but there was no difference in extrapyramidal side effects (EPS). HAL2PBO and HAL2PIM were not significantly different from each other in efficacy but HAL2PIM had less EPS at end point. Both HAL groups and RIS6PBO showed equal improvement in psychopathology at endpoint, indicating HAL 2 mg/day is effective to treat an acute exacerbation in chronic schizophrenia patients. In conclusion, a sub-effective RIS dose combined with PIM to enhance 5-HT2A receptor blockade provided faster onset of action, and at endpoint, equal efficacy and better safety, compared to standard dose RIS. These results support the conclusion that 5-HT2A receptor blockade is a key component of the action of some atypical APDs and can reduce EPS due to a typical APD. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Safety and efficacy of sitaxsentan 50 and 100 mg in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension

Objective: To assess safety and efficacy of sitaxsentan 50 and 100 mg in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Background: Sitaxsentan is a highly selective endothelin-A receptor antagonist that was recently withdrawn by the manufacturer because of a pattern of idiosyncratic liver injury. Methods: Before sitaxsentan withdrawal, this 18-week double-blind, placebo-controlled study randomized patients with PAH to receive placebo or sitaxsentan 50 or 100 mg once daily. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in 6-min walk distance (6MWD) at week 18. Changes in World Health Organization (WHO) functional class and time to clinical worsening (TTCW) were secondary endpoints. The primary efficacy analysis was powered for sitaxsentan 100 mg versus placebo. Results: Of 98 randomized patients, 61% were WHO functional class II at baseline. Improvement from baseline to week 18 in 6MWD occurred with sitaxsentan 100 but not 50 mg; a strong placebo effect was observed. At week 18, WHO functional class was improved or maintained in more patients receiving sitaxsentan 100 mg than placebo (P = 0.038); 0% versus 12% of patients deteriorated, respectively. TTCW was not significantly different for 100-mg sitaxsentan patients than placebo (P = 0.090). Adverse events (AEs) occurring more frequently with sitaxsentan (50 or 100 mg) included headache, peripheral edema, dizziness, nausea, extremity pain, and fatigue; most AEs were of mild or moderate severity. Conclusion: Sitaxsentan 100 mg improved functional class but not 6MWD in PAH patients who were mostly WHO functional class II at baseline. No patient receiving sitaxsentan 100 mg experienced clinical worsening; sitaxsentan was well tolerated. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

A phase I randomized, double-blind, controlled trial of 2009 influenza A (H1N1) inactivated monovalent vaccines with different adjuvant systems

Methods We conducted a phase I, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-arm (10) parallel study involving healthy adults to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of influenza A (H1N1) 2009 non-adjuvanted and adjuvanted candidate vaccines. Subjects received two intramuscular injections of one of the candidate vaccines administered 21 days apart. Antibody responses were measured by means of hemagglutination-inhibition assay before and 21 days after each vaccination. The three co-primary immunogenicity end points were the proportion of seroprotection >70%, seroconversion >40%, and the factor increase in the geometric mean titer >2.5. Results A total of 266 participants were enrolled into the study. No deaths or serious adverse events were reported. The most commonly solicited local and systemic adverse events were injection-site pain and headache, respectively. Only three subjects (1.1%) reported severe injection-site pain. Four 2009 influenza A (H1N1) inactivated monovalent candidate vaccines that met the three requirements to evaluate influenza protection, after a single dose, were identified: 15 μg of hemagglutinin antigen without adjuvant; 7.5 μg of hemagglutinin antigen with aluminum hydroxide, MPL and squalene; 3.75 μg of hemagglutinin antigen with aluminum hydroxide and MPL; and 3.75 μg of hemagglutinin antigen with aluminum hydroxide and squalene. Conclusions Adjuvant systems can be safely used in influenza vaccines, including the adjuvant monophosphoryl lipid A (MPL) derived from Bordetella pertussis with squalene and aluminum hydroxide, MPL with aluminum hydroxide, and squalene and aluminum hydroxide.