Cardiorenal End Points in a Trial of Aliskiren for Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND: This study was undertaken to determine whether use of the direct renin inhibitor aliskiren would reduce cardiovascular and renal events in patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease, cardiovascular disease, or both. METHODS: In a double-blind fashion, we randomly assigned 8561 patients to aliskiren (300 mg daily) or placebo as an adjunct to an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor or an angiotensin-receptor blocker. The primary end point was a composite of the time to cardiovascular death or a first occurrence of cardiac arrest with resuscitation; nonfatal myocardial infarction; nonfatal stroke; unplanned hospitalization for heart failure; end-stage renal disease, death attributable to kidney failure, or the need for renal-replacement therapy with no dialysis or transplantation available or initiated; or doubling of the baseline serum creatinine level. RESULTS: The trial was stopped prematurely after the second interim efficacy analysis. After a median follow-up of 32.9 months, the primary end point had occurred in 783 patients (18.3%) assigned to aliskiren as compared with 732 (17.1%) assigned to placebo (hazard ratio, 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98 to 1.20; P=0.12). Effects on secondary renal end points were similar. Systolic and diastolic blood pressures were lower with aliskiren (between-group differences, 1.3 and 0.6 mm Hg, respectively) and the mean reduction in the urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio was greater (between-group difference, 14 percentage points; 95% CI, 11 to 17). The proportion of patients with hyperkalemia (serum potassium level, ≥6 mmol per liter) was significantly higher in the aliskiren group than in the placebo group (11.2% vs. 7.2%), as was the proportion with reported hypotension (12.1% vs. 8.3%) (P<0.001 for both comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of aliskiren to standard therapy with renin-angiotensin system blockade in patients with type 2 diabetes who are at high risk for cardiovascular and renal events is not supported by these data and may even be harmful. (Funded by Novartis; ALTITUDE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00549757.).

Ranibizumab versus verteporfin for neovascular age-related macular degeneration

BACKGROUND: We compared ranibizumab--a recombinant, humanized, monoclonal antibody Fab that neutralizes all active forms of vascular endothelial growth factor A--with photodynamic therapy with verteporfin in the treatment of predominantly classic neovascular age-related macular degeneration. METHODS: During the first year of this 2-year, multicenter, double-blind study, we randomly assigned patients in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive monthly intravitreal injections of ranibizumab (0.3 mg or 0.5 mg) plus sham verteporfin therapy or monthly sham injections plus active verteporfin therapy. The primary end point was the proportion of patients losing fewer than 15 letters from baseline visual acuity at 12 months. RESULTS: Of the 423 patients enrolled, 94.3% of those given 0.3 mg of ranibizumab and 96.4% of those given 0.5 mg lost fewer than 15 letters, as compared with 64.3% of those in the verteporfin group (P<0.001 for each comparison). Visual acuity improved by 15 letters or more in 35.7% of the 0.3-mg group and 40.3% of the 0.5-mg group, as compared with 5.6% of the verteporfin group (P<0.001 for each comparison). Mean visual acuity increased by 8.5 letters in the 0.3-mg group and 11.3 letters in the 0.5-mg group, as compared with a decrease of 9.5 letters in the verteporfin group (P<0.001 for each comparison). Among 140 patients treated with 0.5 mg of ranibizumab, presumed endophthalmitis occurred in 2 patients (1.4%) and serious uveitis in 1 (0.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Ranibizumab was superior to verteporfin as intravitreal treatment of predominantly classic neovascular age-related macular degeneration, with low rates of serious ocular adverse events. Treatment improved visual acuity on average at 1 year. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00061594 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin during percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND: Whether bivalirudin is superior to unfractionated heparin in patients with stable or unstable angina who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) after pretreatment with clopidogrel is unknown. METHODS: We enrolled 4570 patients with stable or unstable angina (with normal levels of troponin T and creatine kinase MB) who were undergoing PCI after pretreatment with a 600-mg dose of clopidogrel at least 2 hours before the procedure; 2289 patients were randomly assigned in a double-blind manner to receive bivalirudin, and 2281 to receive unfractionated heparin. The primary end point was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, urgent target-vessel revascularization due to myocardial ischemia within 30 days after randomization, or major bleeding during the index hospitalization (with a net clinical benefit defined as a reduction in the incidence of the end point). The secondary end point was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or urgent target-vessel revascularization. RESULTS: The incidence of the primary end point was 8.3% (190 patients) in the bivalirudin group as compared with 8.7% (199 patients) in the unfractionated-heparin group (relative risk, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 1.15; P=0.57). The secondary end point occurred in 134 patients (5.9%) in the bivalirudin group and 115 patients (5.0%) in the unfractionated-heparin group (relative risk, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.49; P=0.23). The incidence of major bleeding was 3.1% (70 patients) in the bivalirudin group and 4.6% (104 patients) in the unfractionated-heparin group (relative risk, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.90; P=0.008). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stable and unstable angina who underwent PCI after pretreatment with clopidogrel, bivalirudin did not provide a net clinical benefit (i.e., it did not reduce the incidence of the composite end point of death, myocardial infarction, urgent target-vessel revascularization, or major bleeding) as compared with unfractionated heparin, but it did significantly reduce the incidence of major bleeding. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00262054.)

Recurrent rearrangements of chromosome 1q21.1 and variable pediatric phenotypes

BACKGROUND: Duplications and deletions in the human genome can cause disease or predispose persons to disease. Advances in technologies to detect these changes allow for the routine identification of submicroscopic imbalances in large numbers of patients. METHODS: We tested for the presence of microdeletions and microduplications at a specific region of chromosome 1q21.1 in two groups of patients with unexplained mental retardation, autism, or congenital anomalies and in unaffected persons. RESULTS: We identified 25 persons with a recurrent 1.35-Mb deletion within 1q21.1 from screening 5218 patients. The microdeletions had arisen de novo in eight patients, were inherited from a mildly affected parent in three patients, were inherited from an apparently unaffected parent in six patients, and were of unknown inheritance in eight patients. The deletion was absent in a series of 4737 control persons (P=1.1x10(-7)). We found considerable variability in the level of phenotypic expression of the microdeletion; phenotypes included mild-to-moderate mental retardation, microcephaly, cardiac abnormalities, and cataracts. The reciprocal duplication was enriched in nine children with mental retardation or autism spectrum disorder and other variable features (P=0.02). We identified three deletions and three duplications of the 1q21.1 region in an independent sample of 788 patients with mental retardation and congenital anomalies. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified recurrent molecular lesions that elude syndromic classification and whose disease manifestations must be considered in a broader context of development as opposed to being assigned to a specific disease. Clinical diagnosis in patients with these lesions may be most readily achieved on the basis of genotype rather than phenotype.

Treatment of patients with the hypereosinophilic syndrome with mepolizumab

BACKGROUND: The hypereosinophilic syndrome is a group of diseases characterized by persistent blood eosinophilia, defined as more than 1500 cells per microliter with end-organ involvement and no recognized secondary cause. Although most patients have a response to corticosteroids, side effects are common and can lead to considerable morbidity. METHODS: We conducted an international, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of an anti-interleukin-5 monoclonal antibody, mepolizumab, in patients with the hypereosinophilic syndrome. Patients were negative for the FIP1L1-PDGFRA fusion gene and required prednisone monotherapy, 20 to 60 mg per day, to maintain a stable clinical status and a blood eosinophil count of less than 1000 per microliter. Patients received either intravenous mepolizumab or placebo while the prednisone dose was tapered. The primary end point was the reduction of the prednisone dose to 10 mg or less per day for 8 or more consecutive weeks. RESULTS: The primary end point was reached in 84% of patients in the mepolizumab group, as compared with 43% of patients in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 2.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.59 to 5.26; P<0.001) with no increase in clinical activity of the hypereosinophilic syndrome. A blood eosinophil count of less than 600 per microliter for 8 or more consecutive weeks was achieved in 95% of patients receiving mepolizumab, as compared with 45% of patients receiving placebo (hazard ratio, 3.53; 95% CI, 1.94 to 6.45; P<0.001). Serious adverse events occurred in seven patients receiving mepolizumab (14 events, including one death; mean [+/-SD] duration of exposure, 6.7+/-1.9 months) and in five patients receiving placebo (7 events; mean duration of exposure, 4.3+/-2.6 months). CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that treatment with mepolizumab, an agent designed to target eosinophils, can result in corticosteroid-sparing for patients negative for FIP1L1-PDGFRA who have the hypereosinophilic syndrome. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00086658 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Motesanib diphosphate in progressive differentiated thyroid cancer

BACKGROUND: The expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is characteristic of differentiated thyroid cancer and is associated with aggressive tumor behavior and a poor clinical outcome. Motesanib diphosphate (AMG 706) is a novel oral inhibitor of VEGF receptors, platelet-derived growth-factor receptor, and KIT. METHODS: In an open-label, single-group, phase 2 study, we treated 93 patients who had progressive, locally advanced or metastatic, radioiodine-resistant differentiated thyroid cancer with 125 mg of motesanib diphosphate, administered orally once daily. The primary end point was an objective response as assessed by an independent radiographic review. Additional end points included the duration of the response, progression-free survival, safety, and changes in serum thyroglobulin concentration. RESULTS: Of the 93 patients, 57 (61%) had papillary thyroid carcinoma. The objective response rate was 14%. Stable disease was achieved in 67% of the patients, and stable disease was maintained for 24 weeks or longer in 35%; 8% had progressive disease as the best response. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the median duration of the response was 32 weeks (the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval [CI] was 24; the upper limit could not be estimated because of an insufficient number of events); the estimate of median progression-free survival was 40 weeks (95% CI, 32 to 50). Among the 75 patients in whom thyroglobulin analysis was performed, 81% had decreased serum thyroglobulin concentrations during treatment, as compared with baseline levels. The most common treatment-related adverse events were diarrhea (in 59% of the patients), hypertension (56%), fatigue (46%), and weight loss (40%). CONCLUSIONS: Motesanib diphosphate can induce partial responses in patients with advanced or metastatic differentiated thyroid cancer that is progressive. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00121628.)

High-dose daunorubicin in older patients with acute myeloid leukemia

BACKGROUND: A complete remission is essential for prolonging survival in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Daunorubicin is a cornerstone of the induction regimen, but the optimal dose is unknown. In older patients, it is usual to give daunorubicin at a dose of 45 to 50 mg per square meter of body-surface area. METHODS: Patients in whom AML or high-risk refractory anemia had been newly diagnosed and who were 60 to 83 years of age (median, 67) were randomly assigned to receive cytarabine, at a dose of 200 mg per square meter by continuous infusion for 7 days, plus daunorubicin for 3 days, either at the conventional dose of 45 mg per square meter (411 patients) or at an escalated dose of 90 mg per square meter (402 patients); this treatment was followed by a second cycle of cytarabine at a dose of 1000 mg per square meter every 12 hours [DOSAGE ERROR CORRECTED] for 6 days. The primary end point was event-free survival. RESULTS: The complete remission rates were 64% in the group that received the escalated dose of daunorubicin and 54% in the group that received the conventional dose (P=0.002); the rates of remission after the first cycle of induction treatment were 52% and 35%, respectively (P<0.001). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the incidence of hematologic toxic effects, 30-day mortality (11% and 12% in the two groups, respectively), or the incidence of moderate, severe, or life-threatening adverse events (P=0.08). Survival end points in the two groups did not differ significantly overall, but patients in the escalated-treatment group who were 60 to 65 years of age, as compared with the patients in the same age group who received the conventional dose, had higher rates of complete remission (73% vs. 51%), event-free survival (29% vs. 14%), and overall survival (38% vs. 23%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with AML who are older than 60 years of age, escalation of the dose of daunorubicin to twice the conventional dose, with the entire dose administered in the first induction cycle, effects a more rapid response and a higher response rate than does the conventional dose, without additional toxic effects. (Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN77039377; and Netherlands National Trial Register number, NTR212.)