Rationale and design of a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study of terutroban 30 mg/day versus aspirin 100 mg/day in stroke patients: the prevention of cerebrovascular and cardiovascular events of ischemic origin with terutroban in patients with a history of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (PERFORM) study

BACKGROUND: Ischemic stroke is the leading cause of mortality worldwide and a major contributor to neurological disability and dementia. Terutroban is a specific TP receptor antagonist with antithrombotic, antivasoconstrictive, and antiatherosclerotic properties, which may be of interest for the secondary prevention of ischemic stroke. This article describes the rationale and design of the Prevention of cerebrovascular and cardiovascular Events of ischemic origin with teRutroban in patients with a history oF ischemic strOke or tRansient ischeMic Attack (PERFORM) Study, which aims to demonstrate the superiority of the efficacy of terutroban versus aspirin in secondary prevention of cerebrovascular and cardiovascular events. METHODS AND RESULTS: The PERFORM Study is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study being carried out in 802 centers in 46 countries. The study population includes patients aged > or =55 years, having suffered an ischemic stroke (< or =3 months) or a transient ischemic attack (< or =8 days). Participants are randomly allocated to terutroban (30 mg/day) or aspirin (100 mg/day). The primary efficacy endpoint is a composite of ischemic stroke (fatal or nonfatal), myocardial infarction (fatal or nonfatal), or other vascular death (excluding hemorrhagic death of any origin). Safety is being evaluated by assessing hemorrhagic events. Follow-up is expected to last for 2-4 years. Assuming a relative risk reduction of 13%, the expected number of primary events is 2,340. To obtain statistical power of 90%, this requires inclusion of at least 18,000 patients in this event-driven trial. The first patient was randomized in February 2006. CONCLUSIONS: The PERFORM Study will explore the benefits and safety of terutroban in secondary cardiovascular prevention after a cerebral ischemic event.

Treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis with ambrisentan: a parallel, randomized trial

BACKGROUND Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is characterized by formation and proliferation of fibroblast foci. Endothelin-1 induces lung fibroblast proliferation and contractile activity via the endothelin A (ETA) receptor. OBJECTIVE To determine whether ambrisentan, an ETA receptor-selective antagonist, reduces the rate of IPF progression. DESIGN Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, event-driven trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00768300). SETTING Academic and private hospitals. PARTICIPANTS Patients with IPF aged 40 to 80 years with minimal or no honeycombing on high-resolution computed tomography scans. INTERVENTION Ambrisentan, 10 mg/d, or placebo. MEASUREMENTS Time to disease progression, defined as death, respiratory hospitalization, or a categorical decrease in lung function. RESULTS The study was terminated after enrollment of 492 patients (75% of intended enrollment; mean duration of exposure to study medication, 34.7 weeks) because an interim analysis indicated a low likelihood of showing efficacy for the end point by the scheduled end of the study. Ambrisentan-treated patients were more likely to meet the prespecified criteria for disease progression (90 [27.4%] vs. 28 [17.2%] patients; P = 0.010; hazard ratio, 1.74 [95% CI, 1.14 to 2.66]). Lung function decline was seen in 55 (16.7%) ambrisentan-treated patients and 19 (11.7%) placebo-treated patients (P = 0.109). Respiratory hospitalizations were seen in 44 (13.4%) and 9 (5.5%) patients in the ambrisentan and placebo groups, respectively (P = 0.007). Twenty-six (7.9%) patients who received ambrisentan and 6 (3.7%) who received placebo died (P = 0.100). Thirty-two (10%) ambrisentan-treated patients and 16 (10%) placebo-treated patients had pulmonary hypertension at baseline, and analysis stratified by the presence of pulmonary hypertension revealed similar results for the primary end point. LIMITATION The study was terminated early. CONCLUSION Ambrisentan was not effective in treating IPF and may be associated with an increased risk for disease progression and respiratory hospitalizations. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE Gilead Sciences.