An integrated analysis of five double-blind, randomized controlled trials evaluating the safety and efficacy of a hyaluronan product for intra-articular injection in osteoarthritis of the kneel

Objective: Five double-blind, randomized, saline-controlled trials (RCTs) were included in the United States marketing application for an intra-articular hyaluronan (IA-HA) product for the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. We report an integrated analysis of the primary Case Report Form (CRF) data from these trials. Method. Trials were similar in design, patient population and outcome measures - all included the Lequesne Algofunctional Index (LI), a validated composite index of pain and function, evaluating treatment over 3 months. Individual patient data were pooled; a repeated measures analysis of covariance was performed in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Analyses utilized both fixed and random effects models. Safety data from the five RCTs were summarized. Results: A total of 1155 patients with radiologically confirmed knee OA were enrolled: 619 received three or five IA-HA injections; 536 received. placebo saline injections. In the active and control groups, mean ages were 61.8 and 61.4 years; 62.4% and 58.8% were women; baseline total Lequesne scores 11.03 and 11.30, respectively. Integrated analysis of the pooled data set found a statistically significant reduction (P < 0.001) in total Lequesne score with hyaluronan (HA) (-2.68) vs placebo (-2.00); estimated difference -0.68 (95% CI: -0.56 to -0.79), effect size 0.20. Additional modeling approaches confirmed robustness of the analyses. Conclusions: This integrated analysis demonstrates that multiple design factors influence the results of RCTs assessing efficacy of intra-articular (IA) therapies, and that integrated analyses based on primary data differ from meta-analyses using transformed data. (C) 2006 OsteoArthritis Research Society International. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Therapeutic efficacy and safety of chaperonin 10 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A double-blind randomised trial

Background Chaperonin 10 (heat shock protein 10, XToll(TM)) has anti-inflammatory properties related to the inhibition of Toll-like receptor signalling pathways. Our aim was to establish whether chaperonin 10 is safe and effective in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Methods in this randomised, double-blind, multicentre study, 23 patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis receiving disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were randomly allocated to three treatment groups receiving intravenous chaperonin 10 twice weekly for 12 weeks at doses of 5 mg (n=8), 7.5 mg (8), or 10 mg (7). The primary outcomes were change in disease activity score (DAS28) and improvement of core disease measures (American College of Rheumatology response score) from baseline to week 12. All analyses were done by intention to treat. This study is registered with the Australian Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRNO12606000041550. Findings Primary endpoint measures improved from day 14 in all groups and continued to improve to day 84. By end of study, a 20% improvement of core disease measures was seen in six (86%, 95% Cl 43-100), a 50% improvement in four (57%, 14-86), and a 70% improvement in two (29%, 0-57) patients given the highest dose of chaperonin 10. Clinical remission (as defined by a DAS28

A comparison of the efficacy and safety of olanzapine versus haloperidol during transition from intramuscular to oral therapy

Background: Acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia who receive intramuscular (IM) medications typically are switched to oral (PO) antipsychotic maintenance therapy Objective: The goal of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of olanzapine versus those of haloperidol during transition from IM to PO therapy We used additional data from a previously reported trial to test the hypothesis that the reduction in agitation achieved by IM olanzapine 10 mg or IM haloperidol 7.5 mg would be maintained following transition to 4 days of PO olanzapine or PO haloperidol (5-20 mg/d for both). We also hypothesized that olanzapine would maintain its more favorable extrapyramidal symptom (EPS) safety profile. Methods: This was a multinational (hospitals in 13 countries), double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. Acutely agitated inpatients with schizophrenia were treated with 1 to 3 IM injections of olanzapine 10 mg or haloperidol 7.5 mg over 24 hours and were entered into a 4-day PO treatment period with the same medication (5-20 mg/d for both). The primary efficacy measurement was reduction in agitation, as measured by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC) score. Adverse events and scores on EPS rating scales were assessed. Results: A total of 311 patients (204 men, 107 women; mean [SD] age, 38.2 [11.6] years) were enrolled (131, 126, and 54 patients in the olanzapine, haloperidol, and placebo groups, respectively). In all, 93.1% (122/131) of olanzapine-treated patients and 92.1% (116/126) of haloperidol-treated patients completed the IM period and entered the PO period; 85.5% (112/131) of olanzapine-treated patients and 84.1% (106/126) of haloperidol-treated patients completed the PO period. IM olanzapine and IM haloperidol effectively reduced agitation over 24 hours (mean [SD] PANSS-EC change, -7.1 [4.8] vs -6.7 [4.3], respectively). Reductions in agitation were sustained throughout the PO period with both study drugs (mean [SD] change from PO period baseline, -0.6 [4.8] vs -1.3 [4.4], respectively). During PO treatment, haloperidol-treated patients spontaneously reported significantly more acute dystonia than olanzapine-treated patients (4.3% [5/116] vs 0% [0/122], respectively; P = 0.026) and akathisia (5.2% [6/116] vs 0% [0/122], respectively; P = 0.013). Significantly more haloperidol-treated patients than olanzapine-treated patients met categorical criteria for treatment-emergent akathisia (18.5% [17/92] vs 6.5% [7/107], respectively; P = 0.015). Conclusions: In the acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia in this study, both IM olanzapine 10 mg and IM haloperidol 7.5 mg effectively reduced agitation over 24 hours. This alleviation of agitation was sustained following transition from IM therapy to 4 days of PO treatment (5-20 mg/d for both). During the 4 days of PO treatment, olanzapine-treated patients did not spontaneously report any incidences of acute dystonia, and olanzapine had a superior EPS safety profile to that of haloperidol. The combination of IM and PO olanzapine may help improve the treatment of acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia. Copyright (C) 2003 Excerpta Medica, Inc.

Safety of neuraminidase inhibitors for influenza

Neuraminidase inhibitors, oseltamivir and zanamivir, are used for the treatment of, and protection from, influenza. The safety of these compounds has been assessed in systematic reviews. However, the data presented are somewhat limited by the paucity of good quality adverse event data available. The majority of safety outcomes are based on evidence from just one or two randomised controlled trials. The results of the systematic reviews suggest that neuraminidase inhibitors have a reasonable side effect and adverse effect profile if they are to be used to treat or protect patients against a life-threatening disease. However, if these compounds are to be prescribed in situations in which avoidance of inconvenience or minor discomfort is hoped for, then the balance of harms to benefits will be more difficult to judge.

Live Attenuated Chimeric Yellow Fever Dengue Type 2 (Chimeri Vax -DEN2) Vaccine: Phase 1 clinical trial for safety and immunogenicity

A randomized double-blind Phase I Trial was conducted to evaluate safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of a yellow fever (YF)-dengue 2 (DEN2) chimera (ChimeriVax™-DEN2) in comparison to that of YF vaccine (YF-VAX®). Forty-two healthy YF naïve adults randomly received a single dose of either ChimeriVax™-DEN2 (high dose, 5 log plaque forming units [PFU] or low dose, 3 log PFU) or YF-VAXâ by the subcutaneous route (SC). To determine the effect of YF pre-immunity on the ChimeriVaxTM-DEN2 vaccine, 14 subjects previously vaccinated against YF received a high dose of ChimeriVax™-DEN2 as an open-label vaccine. Most adverse events were similar to YF-VAX® and of mild to moderate intensity, with no serious side-effects. One hundred percent and 92.3% of YF naïve subjects inoculated with 5.0 and 3.0 log10 PFU of ChimeriVaxTM-DEN2, respectively, seroconverted to wt DEN2 (strain 16681); 92% of subjects inoculated with YF-VAX® seroconverted to YF 17D virus but none of YF naïve subjects inoculated with ChimeriVax-DEN2 seroconverted to YF 17D virus. Low seroconversion rates to heterologous DEN serotypes 1, 3, and 4 were observed in YF naïve subjects inoculated with either ChimeriVax™-DEN2 or YF-VAX®. In contrast, 100% of YF immune subjects inoculated with ChimeriVax™-DEN2 seroconverted to all 4 DEN serotypes. Surprisingly, levels of neutralizing antibodies to DEN 1, 2, and 3 viruses in YF immune subjects persisted after 1 year. These data demonstrated that 1) the safety and immunogenicity profile of the ChimeriVax™-DEN2 vaccine is consistent with that of YF-VAX®, and 2) pre-immunity to YF virus does not interfere with ChimeriVaxTM-DEN2 immunization, but induces a long lasting and cross neutralizing antibody response to all 4 DEN serotypes. The latter observation can have practical implications toward development of a dengue vaccine.