A 6-month open-label study of the effectiveness and tolerability of galantamine in patients with Alzheimer's disease

The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness and tolerability of galantamine in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD) in everyday clinical practice. Patient selection was made on 36 sequential patients attending Belfast City Hospital Memory Clinic between December 2000 and June 2001. Patients were treated with galantamine for 6 months, starting from 4 mg twice daily increasing to 8 mg twice daily and then to 12 mg twice daily at 4-weekly intervals. Patients (25 females, 11 males), mean age 78 years (59-90), were diagnosed with probable AD and had a mini-mental state examination (MMSE) score of 10-26. Efficacy was assessed using the MMSE, neuropsychiatric inventory (NPI), neuropsychiatric inventory caregiver distress (NPI-D) scale and the Bristol activities of daily living (B-ADL) scale at baseline and after 3 and 6 months of treatment. Mean improvements were noted on all four measures of efficacy at 3 and 6 months; improvements were significant on the MMSE, NPI and NPI-D at 3 months and on the NPI-D at 6 months. Galantamine was overall well tolerated. The most common adverse events were gastrointestinal, particularly nausea. Four patients stopped treatment due to adverse events, and seven were stabilised on 8 mg twice daily as they were unable to tolerate the target dose. This naturalistic study confirms clinical trial data, which shows galantamine improves cognition and behavioural symptoms and is overall well tolerated. © 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Vandetanib with FOLFIRI in patients with advanced colorectal adenocarcinoma: results from an open-label, multicentre phase I study.

The safety and tolerability of vandetanib (ZACTIMA; ZD6474) plus FOLFIRI was investigated in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: Patients eligible for first- or second-line chemotherapy received once-daily oral doses of vandetanib (100 or 300 mg) plus 14-day treatment cycles of FOLFIRI. RESULTS: A total of 21 patients received vandetanib 100 mg (n = 11) or 300 mg (n = 10) + FOLFIRI. Combination therapy was well tolerated at both vandetanib dose levels. There were no DLTs in the vandetanib 100 mg cohort and one DLT of hypertension (CTCAE grade 3) in the 300 mg cohort. The most common adverse events were diarrhoea (n = 20), nausea (n = 12) and fatigue (n = 10). Two patients (one in each cohort) discontinued vandetanib due to adverse events (rash, 100 mg cohort; hypertension, 300 mg cohort). There was no apparent pharmacokinetic interaction between vandetanib and FOLFIRI. Preliminary efficacy results included two confirmed partial responses in the 100 mg cohort and 9 patients with stable disease > or =8 weeks (100 mg, n = 7; 300 mg, n = 2). CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily vandetanib (100 or 300 mg) in combination with a standard FOLFIRI regimen was generally well tolerated in patients with advanced CRC.

The use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents with ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis in COMFORT-II: an open-label, phase 3 study assessing efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib versus best available therapy in the treatment of myelofibrosis

BACKGROUND: Anemia is considered a negative prognostic risk factor for survival in patients with myelofibrosis. Most patients with myelofibrosis are anemic, and 35-54 % present with anemia at diagnosis. Ruxolitinib, a potent inhibitor of Janus kinase (JAK) 1 and JAK2, was associated with an overall survival benefit and improvements in splenomegaly and patient-reported outcomes in patients with myelofibrosis in the two phase 3 COMFORT studies. Consistent with the ruxolitinib mechanism of action, anemia was a frequently reported adverse event. In clinical practice, anemia is sometimes managed with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs). This post hoc analysis evaluated the safety and efficacy of concomitant ruxolitinib and ESA administration in patients enrolled in COMFORT-II, an open-label, phase 3 study comparing the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib with best available therapy for treatment of myelofibrosis. Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive ruxolitinib 15 or 20 mg twice daily or best available therapy. Spleen volume was assessed by magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography scan.

RESULTS: Thirteen of 146 ruxolitinib-treated patients had concomitant ESA administration (+ESA). The median exposure to ruxolitinib was 114 weeks in the +ESA group and 111 weeks in the overall ruxolitinib arm; the median ruxolitinib dose intensity was 33 mg/day for each group. Six weeks before the first ESA administration, 10 of the 13 patients had grade 3/4 hemoglobin abnormalities. These had improved to grade 2 in 7 of the 13 patients by 6 weeks after the first ESA administration. The rate of packed red blood cell transfusions per month within 12 weeks before and after first ESA administration remained the same in 1 patient, decreased in 2 patients, and increased in 3 patients; 7 patients remained transfusion independent. Reductions in splenomegaly were observed in 69 % of evaluable patients (9/13) following first ESA administration.

CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant use of an ESA with ruxolitinib was well tolerated and did not affect the efficacy of ruxolitinib. Further investigations evaluating the effects of ESAs to alleviate anemia in ruxolitinib-treated patients are warranted (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00934544; July 6, 2009).

Epirubicin, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine with or without panitumumab for patients with previously untreated advanced oesophagogastric cancer (REAL3): a randomised, open-label phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: EGFR overexpression occurs in 27-55% of oesophagogastric adenocarcinomas, and correlates with poor prognosis. We aimed to assess addition of the anti-EGFR antibody panitumumab to epirubicin, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine (EOC) in patients with advanced oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label phase 3 trial (REAL3), we enrolled patients with untreated, metastatic, or locally advanced oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma at 63 centres (tertiary referral centres, teaching hospitals, and district general hospitals) in the UK. Eligible patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive up to eight 21-day cycles of open-label EOC (epirubicin 50 mg/m(2) and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1 and capecitabine 1250 mg/m(2) per day on days 1-21) or modified-dose EOC plus panitumumab (mEOC+P; epirubicin 50 mg/m(2) and oxaliplatin 100 mg/m(2) on day 1, capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) per day on days 1-21, and panitumumab 9 mg/kg on day 1). Randomisation was blocked and stratified for centre region, extent of disease, and performance status. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. We assessed safety in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. After a preplanned independent data monitoring committee review in October, 2011, trial recruitment was halted and panitumumab withdrawn. Data for patients on treatment were censored at this timepoint. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00824785. FINDINGS: Between June 2, 2008, and Oct 17, 2011, we enrolled 553 eligible patients. Median overall survival in 275 patients allocated EOC was 11.3 months (95% CI 9.6-13.0) compared with 8.8 months (7.7-9.8) in 278 patients allocated mEOC+P (hazard ratio [HR] 1.37, 95% CI 1.07-1.76; p=0.013). mEOC+P was associated with increased incidence of grade 3-4 diarrhoea (48 [17%] of 276 patients allocated mEOC+P vs 29 [11%] of 266 patients allocated EOC), rash (29 [11%] vs two [1%]), mucositis (14 [5%] vs none), and hypomagnesaemia (13 [5%] vs none) but reduced incidence of haematological toxicity (grade ≥ 3 neutropenia 35 [13%] vs 74 [28%]). INTERPRETATION: Addition of panitumumab to EOC chemotherapy does not increase overall survival and cannot be recommended for use in an unselected population with advanced oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma. FUNDING: Amgen, UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre.

Radium-223 and concomitant therapies in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: an international, early access, open-label, single-arm phase 3b trial

BACKGROUND: In the previously reported ALSYMPCA trial in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and symptomatic bone metastases, overall survival was significantly longer in patients treated with radium-223 dichloride (radium-223) than in patients treated with placebo. In this study, we investigated safety and overall survival in radium-223 treated patients in an early access programme done after the ALSYMPCA study and before regulatory approval of radium-223.

METHODS: We did an international, prospective, interventional, open-label, single-arm, phase 3b study. Enrolled patients were aged 18 years or older with histologically or cytologically confirmed progressive bone-predominant metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with two or more skeletal metastases on imaging (with no restriction as to whether they were symptomatic or asymptomatic; without visceral disease but lymph node metastases were allowed). Patients received intravenous injections of radium-223, 50 kBq/kg (current recommendation 55 kBq/kg after implementation of National Institute of Standards and Technology update on April 18, 2016) every 4 weeks for up to six injections. Other concomitant anticancer therapies were allowed. Primary endpoints were safety and overall survival. The safety and efficacy analyses were done on all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. The study has been completed, and we report the final analysis here. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01618370, and the European Union Clinical Trials Register, EudraCT number 2012-000075-16.

FINDINGS: Between July 22, 2012, and Dec 19, 2013, 839 patients were enrolled from 113 sites in 14 countries. 696 patients received one or more doses of radium-223; 403 (58%) of these patients had all six planned injections. Any-grade treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 523 (75%) of 696 patients; any-grade treatment-emergent adverse events deemed to be related to treatment were reported in 281 (40%) patients. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia in 32 (5%) patients, thrombocytopenia in 15 (2%) patients, neutropenia in ten (1%) patients, and leucopenia in nine (1%) patients. Any grade of serious adverse events were reported in 243 (35%) patients. Median follow-up was 7·5 months (IQR 5-11) and 210 deaths were reported; median overall survival was 16 months (95% CI 13-not available [NA]). In an exploratory analysis of overall survival with predefined factors, median overall survival was longer for: patients with baseline alkaline phosphatase concentration less than the upper limit of normal (ULN; median NA, 95% CI 16 months-NA) than for patients with an alkaline phosphatase concentration equal to or greater than the ULN (median 12 months, 11-15); patients with baseline haemoglobin levels 10 g/dL or greater (median 17 months, 14-NA) than for patients with haemoglobin levels less than 10 g/dL (median 10 months, 8-14); patients with a baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0 (median NA, 17 months-NA) than for patients with an ECOG PS of 1 (median 13 months, 11-NA) or an ECOG PS of 2 or more (median 7 months, 5-11); and for patients with no reported baseline pain (median NA, 16 months-NA) than for those with mild pain (median 14 months, 13-NA) or moderate-severe pain (median 11 months, 9-13). Median overall survival was also longer in patients who received radium-223 plus abiraterone, enzalutamide, or both (median NA, 95% CI 16 months-NA) than in those who did not receive these agents (median 13 months, 12-16), and in patients who received radium-223 plus denosumab (median NA, 15 months-NA) than in patients who received radium-223 without denosumab (median 13 months, 12-NA).

INTERPRETATION: Our findings show that radium-223 can be safely combined with abiraterone or enzalutamide, which are now both part of the standard of care for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Furthermore, our findings extend to patients who were asymptomatic at baseline, unlike those enrolled in the pivotal ALSYMPCA study. The findings of prolonged survival in patients treated with concomitant abiraterone, enzalutamide, or denosumab require confirmation in prospective randomised trials.

FUNDING: Pharmaceutical Division of Bayer.

A randomized controlled trial of tea tree oil (5%) body wash versus standard body wash to prevent colonization with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in critically ill adults: research protocol

Background
Over the past ten years MRSA has become endemic in hospitals and is associated with increased healthcare costs. Critically ill patients are most at risk, in part because of the number of invasive therapies that they require in the intensive care unit (ICU). Washing with 5% tea tree oil (TTO) has been shown to be effective in removing MRSA on the skin. However, to date, no trials have evaluated the potential of TTO body wash to prevent MRSA colonization or infection. In addition, detecting MRSA by usual culture methods is slow. A faster method using a PCR assay has been developed in the laboratory, but requires evaluation in a large number of patients.

Methods/Design
This study protocol describes the design of a multicentre, phase II/III prospective open-label randomized controlled clinical trial to evaluate whether a concentration of 5% TTO is effective in preventing MRSA colonization in comparison with a standard body wash (Johnsons Baby Softwash) in the ICU. In addition we will evaluate the cost-effectiveness of TTO body wash and assess the effectiveness of the PCR assay in detecting MRSA in critically ill patients. On admission to intensive care, swabs from the nose and groin will be taken to screen for MRSA as per current practice. Patients will be randomly assigned to be washed with the standard body wash or TTO body wash. On discharge from the unit, swabs will be taken again to identify whether there is a difference in MRSA colonization between the two groups.

Discussion
If TTO body wash is found to be effective, widespread implementation of such a simple colonization prevention tool has the potential to impact on patient outcomes, healthcare resource use and patient confidence both nationally and internationally.

Trial Registration
[ISRCTN65190967]

Effect of atorvastatin on circulating hsCRP concentrations: A sub-study of the Achieve Cholesterol Targets Fast with Atorvastatin Stratified Titration (ACTFAST) study

Background: Elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) concentration is a risk factor for cardiovascular events that may add prognostic information. Statin treatment is associated with significant reductions in CRP concentrations, which appear to be unrelated to the magnitude of LDL-cholesterol reduction. We investigated the effect of atorvastatin, across its dose range, on high sensitivity (hs)CRP in subjects at high cardiovascular risk. Methods: ACTFAST was a 12 week, prospective, multicenter, open-label trial in which high-risk subjects were assigned a starting dose of atorvastatin (10, 20, 40 or 80 mg/d) based on LDL-C and status of statin use at screening (1345 statin-free [ SF] and 772 previously statin-treated [ST]). Results: At baseline, ST subjects had significantly lower hsCRP levels than SF subjects (ST group 2.31, 95% CI 2.15, 2.48 mg/L vs. SF group 3.16, 95% CI 2.98, 3.34 mg/L, p

Celecoxib plus hormone therapy versus hormone therapy alone for hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: first results from the STAMPEDE multiarm, multistage, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND:
Long-term hormone therapy alone is standard care for metastatic or high-risk, non-metastatic prostate cancer. STAMPEDE--an international, open-label, randomised controlled trial--uses a novel multiarm, multistage design to assess whether the early additional use of one or two drugs (docetaxel, zoledronic acid, celecoxib, zoledronic acid and docetaxel, or zoledronic acid and celecoxib) improves survival in men starting first-line, long-term hormone therapy. Here, we report the preplanned, second intermediate analysis comparing hormone therapy plus celecoxib (arm D) with hormone therapy alone (control arm A).
METHODS:
Eligible patients were men with newly diagnosed or rapidly relapsing prostate cancer who were starting long-term hormone therapy for the first time. Hormone therapy was given as standard care in all trial arms, with local radiotherapy encouraged for newly diagnosed patients without distant metastasis. Randomisation was done using minimisation with a random element across seven stratification factors. Patients randomly allocated to arm D received celecoxib 400 mg twice daily, given orally, until 1 year or disease progression (including prostate-specific antigen [PSA] failure). The intermediate outcome was failure-free survival (FFS) in three activity stages; the primary outcome was overall survival in a subsequent efficacy stage. Research arms were compared pairwise against the control arm on an intention-to-treat basis. Accrual of further patients was discontinued in any research arm showing safety concerns or insufficient evidence of activity (lack of benefit) compared with the control arm. The minimum targeted activity at the second intermediate activity stage was a hazard ratio (HR) of 0·92. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00268476, and with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN78818544.
FINDINGS:
2043 patients were enrolled in the trial from Oct 17, 2005, to Jan 31, 2011, of whom 584 were randomly allocated to receive hormone therapy alone (control group; arm A) and 291 to receive hormone therapy plus celecoxib (arm D). At the preplanned analysis of the second intermediate activity stage, with 305 FFS events (209 in arm A, 96 in arm D), there was no evidence of an advantage for hormone therapy plus celecoxib over hormone therapy alone: HR 0·94 (95% CI 0·74-1·20). [corrected]. 2-year FFS was 51% (95% CI 46-56) in arm A and 51% (95% CI 43-58) in arm D. There was no evidence of differences in the incidence of adverse events between groups (events of grade 3 or higher were noted at any time in 123 [23%, 95% CI 20-27] patients in arm A and 64 [25%, 19-30] in arm D). The most common grade 3-5 events adverse effects in both groups were endocrine disorders (55 [11%] of patients in arm A vs 19 [7%] in arm D) and musculoskeletal disorders (30 [6%] of patients in arm A vs 15 [6%] in arm D). The independent data monitoring committee recommended stopping accrual to both celecoxib-containing arms on grounds of lack of benefit and discontinuing celecoxib for patients currently on treatment, which was endorsed by the trial steering committee.
INTERPRETATION:
Celecoxib 400 mg twice daily for up to 1 year is insufficiently active in patients starting hormone therapy for high-risk prostate cancer, and we do not recommend its use in this setting. Accrual continues seamlessly to the other research arms and follow-up of all arms will continue to assess effects on overall survival.

A multinational, randomised, 12-week, comparative study of donepezil and rivastigmine in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease

This 12-week, multinational study compared the tolerability and cognitive effects of donepezil (up to 10 mg once daily) and rivastigmine (up to 6 mg twice daily) in 111 patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease. Both medications were administered open label according to recommended dosing regimens from the respective product labelling available during the conduct of the study. More patients in the donepezil group (89.3%) completed the study compared with the rivastigmine group (69.1%; p=0.009), and 10.7% of the donepezil group and 21.8% of the rivastigmine group discontinued due to adverse events (AEs); 87.5% of donepezil-treated patients and 47.3% of rivastigmine-treated patients remained on the maximum approved dose of each drug at the last study visit. Both groups showed comparable improvements on the ADAS-cog administered by raters blind to study medication at weeks 4 and 12. Thus, using the recommended dosing schedules, donepezil was better tolerated with fewer discontinuations due to AEs, and both agents improved cognition to a similar extent.

Tea tree oil (5%) body wash versus standard care (Johnson's Baby Softwash) to prevent colonization with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in critically ill adults::a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether the daily use of 5% tea tree oil (TTO) body wash (Novabac 5% Skin Wash) compared with standard care [Johnson's Baby Softwash (JBS)] had a lower incidence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonization.

PATIENTS: The study setting was two intensive care units (ICUs; mixed medical, surgical and trauma) in Northern Ireland between October 2007 and July 2009. The study population comprised 391 patients who were randomized to JBS or TTO body wash.

METHODS: This was a Phase 2/3, prospective, open-label, randomized, controlled trial. Trial registration: ISRCTN65190967. The primary outcome was new MRSA colonization during ICU stay. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of MRSA bacteraemia and maximum increase in sequential organ failure assessment score.

RESULTS: A total of 445 patients were randomized to the study. After randomization, 54 patients were withdrawn; 30 because of a positive MRSA screen at study entry, 11 due to lack of consent, 11 were inappropriately randomized and 2 had adverse reactions. Thirty-nine (10%) patients developed new MRSA colonization (JBS n?=?22, 11.2%; TTO body wash n?=?17, 8.7%). The difference in percentage colonized (2.5%, 95% CI -?8.95 to 3.94; P?=?0.50) was not significant. The mean maximum increase in sequential organ failure assessment score was not significant (JBS 1.44, SD 1.92; TTO body wash 1.28, SD 1.79; P?=?0.85) and no study patients developed MRSA bacteraemia.

CONCLUSIONS: Compared with JBS, TTO body wash cannot be recommended as an effective means of reducing MRSA colonization.

A phase II study of vorinostat (MK-0683) in patients with polycythaemia vera and essential thrombocythaemia

Inhibition of histone deacetylases may be an important target in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms. This investigator-initiated, non-randomized, open-label phase II multi-centre study included 63 patients (19 essential thrombocythaemia, 44 polycythaemia vera) from 15 centres. The primary objective was to evaluate if vorinostat was followed by a decline in clonal myeloproliferation as defined by European Leukaemia Net. Thirty patients (48%) completed the intervention period (24 weeks of therapy). An intention-to-treat response rate of 35% was identified. Pruritus was resolved [19% to 0% (P = 0·06)] and the prevalence of splenomegaly was lowered from 50% to 27% (P = 0·03). Sixty-five per cent of the patients experienced a decrease in JAK2 V617F allele burden (P = 0·006). Thirty-three patients (52% of patients) discontinued study drug before end of intervention due to adverse events (28 patients) or lack of response (5 patients). In conclusion, vorinostat showed effectiveness by normalizing elevated leucocyte and platelet counts, resolving pruritus and significantly reducing splenomegaly. However, vorinostat was associated with significant side effects resulting in a high discontinuation rate. A lower dose of vorinostat in combination with conventional and/or novel targeted therapies may be warranted in future studies.

Intermittent chemotherapy plus either intermittent or continuous cetuximab for first-line treatment of patients with KRAS wild-type advanced colorectal cancer (COIN-B): a randomised phase 2 trial

Background: Advanced colorectal cancer is treated with a combination of cytotoxic drugs and targeted treatments. However, how best to minimise the time spent taking cytotoxic drugs and whether molecular selection can refine this further is unknown. The primary aim of this study was to establish how cetuximab might be safely and effectively added to intermittent chemotherapy.

Methods: COIN-B was an open-label, multicentre, randomised, exploratory phase 2 trial done at 30 hospitals in the UK and one in Cyprus. We enrolled patients with advanced colorectal cancer who had received no previous chemotherapy for metastases. Randomisation was done centrally (by telephone) by the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit using minimisation with a random element. Treatment allocation was not masked. Patients were assigned (1:1) to intermittent chemotherapy plus intermittent cetuximab or to intermittent chemotherapy plus continuous cetuximab. Chemotherapy was FOLFOX (folinic acid and oxaliplatin followed by bolus and infused fluorouracil). Patients in both groups received FOLFOX and weekly cetuximab for 12 weeks, then either had a planned interruption (those taking intermittent cetuximab) or planned maintenance by continuing on weekly cetuximab (continuous cetuximab). On RECIST progression, FOLFOX plus cetuximab or FOLFOX was recommenced for 12 weeks followed by further interruption or maintenance cetuximab, respectively. The primary outcome was failure-free survival at 10 months. The primary analysis population consisted of patients who completed 12 weeks of treatment without progression, death, or leaving the trial. We tested BRAF and NRAS status retrospectively. The trial was registered, ISRCTN38375681.

Findings: We registered 401 patients, 226 of whom were enrolled. Results for 169 with KRAS wild-type are reported here, 78 (46%) assigned to intermittent cetuximab and 91 (54%) to continuous cetuximab. 64 patients assigned to intermittent cetuximab and 66 of those assigned to continuous cetuximab were included in the primary analysis. 10-month failure-free survival was 50% (lower bound of 95% CI 39) in the intermittent group versus 52% (lower bound of 95% CI 41) in the continuous group; median failure-free survival was 12·2 months (95% CI 8·8–15·6) and 14·3 months (10·7–20·4), respectively. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were skin rash (21 [27%] of 77 patients vs 20 [22%] of 92 patients), neutropenia (22 [29%] vs 30 [33%]), diarrhoea (14 [18%] vs 23 [25%]), and lethargy (20 [26%] vs 19 [21%]).

Interpretation: Cetuximab was safely incorporated in two first-line intermittent chemotherapy strategies. Maintenance of biological monotherapy, with less cytotoxic chemotherapy within the first 6 months, in molecularly selected patients is promising and should be validated in phase 3 trials.

Efficacy and safety of ivacaftor in patients with cystic fibrosis who have an Arg117His-CFTR mutation: a double-blind, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Ivacaftor has been previously assessed in patients with cystic fibrosis with Gly551Asp-CFTR or other gating mutations. We assessed ivacaftor in patients with Arg117His-CFTR, a residual function mutation.

METHODS: We did a 24-week, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomised clinical trial, which enrolled 69 patients with cystic fibrosis aged 6 years and older with Arg117His-CFTR and percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s (% predicted FEV1) of at least 40. We randomly assigned eligible patients (1:1) to receive placebo or ivacaftor 150 mg every 12 h for 24 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by age (6-11, 12-17, and ≥18 years) and % predicted FEV1 (<70, ≥70 to ≤90, and >90). The primary outcome was the absolute change from baseline in % predicted FEV1 through week 24. Secondary outcomes included safety and changes in sweat chloride concentrations and Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire-Revised (CFQ-R) respiratory domain scores. An open-label extension enrolled 65 of the patients after washout; after 12 weeks, we did an interim analysis.

FINDINGS: After 24 weeks, the treatment difference in mean absolute change in % predicted FEV1 between ivacaftor (n=34) and placebo (n=35) was 2·1 percentage points (95% CI -1·13 to 5·35; p=0·20). Ivacaftor treatment resulted in significant treatment differences in sweat chloride (-24·0 mmol/L, 95% CI -28·01 to -19·93; p<0·0001) and CFQ-R respiratory domain (8·4, 2·17 to 14·61; p=0·009). In prespecified subgroup analyses, % predicted FEV1 significantly improved with ivacaftor in patients aged 18 years or older (treatment difference vs placebo: 5·0 percentage points, 95% CI 1·15 to 8·78; p=0·01), but not in patients aged 6-11 years (-6·3 percentage points, -11·96 to -0·71; p=0·03). In the extension study, both placebo-to-ivacaftor and ivacaftor-to-ivacaftor groups showed % predicted FEV1 improvement (absolute change from post-washout baseline at week 12: placebo-to-ivacaftor, 5·0 percentage points [p=0·0005]; ivacaftor-to-ivacaftor, 6·0 percentage points [p=0·006]). We did not identify any new safety concerns. The studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (the randomised, placebo-controlled study, number NCT01614457; the open-label extension study, number NCT01707290).

INTERPRETATION: Although this study did not show a significant improvement in % predicted FEV1, ivacaftor did significantly improve sweat chloride and CFQ-R respiratory domain scores and lung function in adult patients with Arg117His-CFTR, indicating that ivacaftor might benefit patients with Arg117His-CFTR who have established disease.