Your Health Matters: The Annual Report of the Chief Medical Officer for Northern Ireland 2014

Northern Ireland’s Chief Medical Officer (CMO), Dr Michael McBride, says everyone should receive high quality and safe health care and highlights some of the biggest public health issues facing Northern Ireland in his annual report. Some of the main topics in the report include alcohol, smoking, blind cord safety, new vaccination programmes and Ebola.

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.)

Concomitant or sequential administration of live attenuated Japanese encephalitis chimeric virus vaccine and yellow fever 17D vaccine : randomized double-blind phase II evaluation of safety and immunogenicity

A randomized, double-blind, study was conducted to evaluate the safety, tolerability and immunogenicity of a live attenuated Japanese encephalitis chimeric virus vaccine (JE-CV) co-administered with live attenuated yellow fever (YF) vaccine (YF-17D strain; Stamaril(®), Sanofi Pasteur) or administered successively. Participants (n = 108) were randomized to receive: YF followed by JE-CV 30 days later, JE followed by YF 30 days later, or the co-administration of JE and YF followed or preceded by placebo 30 days later or earlier. Placebo was used in a double-dummy fashion to ensure masking. Neutralizing antibody titers against JE-CV, YF-17D and selected wild-type JE virus strains was determined using a 50% serum-dilution plaque reduction neutralization test. Seroconversion was defined as the appearance of a neutralizing antibody titer above the assay cut-off post-immunization when not present pre-injection at day 0, or a least a four-fold rise in neutralizing antibody titer measured before the pre-injection day 0 and later post vaccination samples. There were no serious adverse events. Most adverse events (AEs) after JE vaccination were mild to moderate in intensity, and similar to those reported following YF vaccination. Seroconversion to JE-CV was 100% and 91% in the JE/YF and YF/JE sequential vaccination groups, respectively, compared with 96% in the co-administration group. All participants seroconverted to YF vaccine and retained neutralizing titers above the assay cut-off at month six. Neutralizing antibodies against JE vaccine were detected in 82-100% of participants at month six. These results suggest that both vaccines may be successfully co-administered simultaneously or 30 days apart.

Integrated analysis of CANVAS 1 and 2: phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind studies to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ceftaroline versus vancomycin plus aztreonam in complicated skin and skin-structure infection.

BACKGROUND: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a common cause of complicated skin and skin-structure infection (cSSSI). Increasing antimicrobial resistance in cSSSI has led to a need for new safe and effective therapies. Ceftaroline was evaluated as treatment for cSSSI in 2 identical phase 3 clinical trials, the pooled analysis of which is presented here. The primary objective of each trial was to determine the noninferiority of the clinical cure rate achieved with ceftaroline monotherapy, compared with that achieved with vancomycin plus aztreonam combination therapy, in the clinically evaluable (CE) and modified intent-to-treat (MITT) patient populations. METHODS: Adult patients with cSSSI requiring intravenous therapy received ceftaroline (600 mg every 12 h) or vancomycin plus aztreonam (1 g each every 12 h) for 5-14 days. RESULTS: Of 1378 patients enrolled in both trials, 693 received ceftaroline and 685 received vancomycin plus aztreonam. Baseline characteristics of the treatment groups were comparable. Clinical cure rates were similar for ceftaroline and vancomycin plus aztreonam in the CE (91.6% vs 92.7%) and MITT (85.9% vs 85.5%) populations, respectively, as well as in patients infected with MRSA (93.4% vs 94.3%). The rates of adverse events, discontinuations because of an adverse event, serious adverse events, and death also were similar between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Ceftaroline achieved high clinical cure rates, was efficacious against cSSSI caused by MRSA and other common cSSSI pathogens, and was well tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with the cephalosporin class. Ceftaroline has the potential to provide a monotherapy alternative for the treatment of cSSSI. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00424190 for CANVAS 1 and NCT00423657 for CANVAS 2.

Elderly patients with hypercholesterolaemia:a double-blind study of the efficacy, safety and tolerability of fluvastatin

Coronary heart disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the elderly, a rapidly growing section of the population. Elderly patients have been excluded from most preventative risk factor trials.

Efficacy and safety of radium-223 dichloride in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and symptomatic bone metastases, with or without previous docetaxel use: A prespecified subgroup analysis from the randomised, double-blind, phase 3 ALSYMPCA trial

Background: Primary results from the phase 3 ALSYMPCA trial showed that radium-223 dichloride (radium-223), a targeted α-emitter, improved overall survival compared with placebo and was well tolerated in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and symptomatic bone metastases. We did a prespecified subgroup analysis from ALSYMPCA to assess the effect of previous docetaxel use on the efficacy and safety of radium-223. 

Methods: In the phase 3, randomised, double-blind ALSYMPCA trial, patients with symptomatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, at least two symptomatic bone metastases, no known visceral metastases, and who were receiving best standard of care were randomly assigned (2:1) via an interactive voice response system to receive six injections of radium-223 (50 kBq/kg intravenously) or matching placebo, with one injection given every 4 weeks. Patients had either received previous docetaxel treatment or were unsuitable for or declined docetaxel; previous docetaxel use (yes or no) was a trial stratification factor. We investigated the effect of previous docetaxel use on radium-223 treatment for the primary endpoint of overall survival, the main secondary efficacy endpoints, and safety. Efficacy analyses were done for the intention-to-treat population; safety analyses were done for the safety population. The trial has been completed and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00699751. 

Findings: Randomisation took place between June 12, 2008, and Feb 1, 2011. 526 (57%) of 921 randomly assigned patients had received previous docetaxel treatment (352 in the radium-223 group and 174 in the placebo group) and 395 (43%) had not (262 in the radium-223 group and 133 in the placebo group). Radium-223 prolonged median overall survival compared with placebo, irrespective of previous docetaxel use (previous docetaxel use, hazard ratio [HR] 0·70, 95% CI 0·56-0·88; p=0·002; no previous docetaxel use, HR 0·69, 0·52-0·92; p=0·01). The benefit of radium-223 compared with placebo was seen in both docetaxel subgroups for most main secondary efficacy endpoints; risk for time to time to first symptomatic skeletal event was reduced with radium-223 versus placebo in patients with previous docetaxel use, but the difference was not significant in those with no previous docetaxel use. 322 (62%) of 518 patients previously treated with docetaxel had grade 3-4 adverse events, compared with 205 (54%) of 383 patients without docetaxel. Patients who had previously been treated with docetaxel had a higher incidence of grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia with radium-223 than with placebo (31 [9%] of 347 patients vs five [3%] of 171 patients), whereas the incidence was similar between treatment groups among patients with no previous docetaxel use (seven [3%] of 253 patients vs one [1%] of 130 patients). The incidences of grade 3-4 anaemia and neutropenia were similar between the radium-223 and placebo groups within both docetaxel subgroups. 

Interpretation: Radium-223 is effective and well tolerated in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and symptomatic bone metastases, irrespective of previous docetaxel use. 

Funding: Algeta ASA and Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.

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.

Safety of human immunisation with a live-attenuated Mycobacterium tuberculosis vaccine: a randomised, double-blind, controlled phase I trial.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis remains one of the world's deadliest transmissible diseases despite widespread use of the BCG vaccine. MTBVAC is a new live tuberculosis vaccine based on genetically attenuated Mycobacterium tuberculosis that expresses most antigens present in human isolates of M tuberculosis. We aimed to compare the safety of MTBVAC with BCG in healthy adult volunteers. METHODS: We did this single-centre, randomised, double-blind, controlled phase 1 study at the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (CHUV; Lausanne, Switzerland). Volunteers were eligible for inclusion if they were aged 18-45 years, clinically healthy, HIV-negative and tuberculosis-negative, and had no history of active tuberculosis, chemoprophylaxis for tuberculosis, or BCG vaccination. Volunteers fulfilling the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to three cohorts in a dose-escalation manner. Randomisation was done centrally by the CHUV Pharmacy and treatments were masked from the study team and volunteers. As participants were recruited within each cohort, they were randomly assigned 3:1 to receive MTBVAC or BCG. Of the participants allocated MTBVAC, those in the first cohort received 5 × 10(3) colony forming units (CFU) MTBVAC, those in the second cohort received 5 × 10(4) CFU MTBVAC, and those in the third cohort received 5 × 10(5) CFU MTBVAC. In all cohorts, participants assigned to receive BCG were given 5 × 10(5) CFU BCG. Each participant received a single intradermal injection of their assigned vaccine in 0·1 mL sterile water in their non-dominant arm. The primary outcome was safety in all vaccinated participants. Secondary outcomes included whole blood cell-mediated immune response to live MTBVAC and BCG, and interferon γ release assays (IGRA) of peripheral blood mononuclear cells. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02013245. FINDINGS: Between Jan 23, 2013, and Nov 6, 2013, we enrolled 36 volunteers into three cohorts, each of which consisted of nine participants who received MTBVAC and three who received BCG. 34 volunteers completed the trial. The safety of vaccination with MTBVAC at all doses was similar to that of BCG, and vaccination did not induce any serious adverse events. All individuals were IGRA negative at the end of follow-up (day 210). After whole blood stimulation with live MTBVAC or BCG, MTBVAC was at least as immunogenic as BCG. At the same dose as BCG (5×10(5) CFU), although no statistical significance could be achieved, there were more responders in the MTBVAC group than in the BCG group, with a greater frequency of polyfunctional CD4+ central memory T cells. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, MTBVAC is the first live-attenuated M tuberculosis vaccine to reach clinical assessment, showing similar safety to BCG. MTBVAC seemed to be at least as immunogenic as BCG, but the study was not powered to investigate this outcome. Further plans to use more immunogenicity endpoints in a larger number of volunteers (adults and adolescents) are underway, with the aim to thoroughly characterise and potentially distinguish immunogenicity between MTBVAC and BCG in tuberculosis-endemic countries. Combined with an excellent safety profile, these data support advanced clinical development in high-burden tuberculosis endemic countries. FUNDING: Biofabri and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation through the TuBerculosis Vaccine Initiative (TBVI).

Efficacy and safety of a soy isoflavone extract in postmenopausal women: A randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled study

Objective: To investigate the efficacy of soy isoflavone on climacteric symptoms in postmenopausal women.Design: In this double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study, a total of 80 women (mean age =55.1 years), who reported 5 or more hot flush episodes per day, were randomized to receive either 250 mg of standardized soy extract (Glycine max AT) a total of 100 mg/day of isoflavone (n=40) or placebo (n=40). Exclusion criteria included: contra-indication for hormone therapy (HT), chronic gastrointestinal diseases, and users of HT within the preceding 6-months. For 10-months, climacteric symptoms were evaluated using a score card and the menopausal Kupperman index. Compliance and safety were also assessed. At baseline and the end of the study, lipid and hormonal profiles, as well as vaginal, mammographic and ultrasonographic parameters were measured. The t-test, Wilcoxon test and ANOVA were used in the statistical analysis.Results: At baseline, the mean number of hot flushes was 9.6 +/- 3.9 per day in the isoflavone group and 10.1 +/- 4.9 in the placebo group (p>0.05). After 10 months, there was a significant reduction in frequency of hot flushes among isoflavone users when compared to those on placebo (3.1 +/- 2.3 and 5.9 +/- 4.3, respectively) (p<0.001). Kupperman index mean values showed a significant reduction in both groups. However, soy isoflavone was significantly superior to placebo, in reducing hot flush severity (69.9% and 33.7%, respectively) (p<0.001). Endometrial thickness, mammography, vaginal cytology, lipids and hormonal profile did not change in both groups. No serious adverse event related to isoflavone treatment was reported.Conclusions: the soy isoflavone extract exerted favorable effects on vasomotor symptoms and good compliance, providing a safe and effective alternative therapeutic for postmenopausal women. (C) 2007 Elsevier B.V.. All rights reserved.

A double-blind randomised study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bindarit in preventing coronary stent restenosis.

AIMS Bindarit (BND) is a selective inhibitor of monocyte chemotactic protein-1 (MCP-1/CCL2), which plays an important role in generating intimal hyperplasia. Our aim was to explore the efficacy and safety of bindarit in preventing restenosis following percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS AND RESULTS A phase II, double-blind, multicentre randomised trial included 148 patients randomised into three arms (BND 600 mg, n=48; BND 1,200 mg, n=49; PLB, n=51). Bindarit was given following PCI and continued for 180 days. Monthly clinical follow-up and six-month coronary angiography were conducted. The primary endpoint was in-segment late loss; the main secondary endpoints were in-stent late loss and major adverse cardiovascular events. Efficacy analysis was carried out on two populations, ITT and PP. There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics among the three treatment groups. In-segment and in-stent late loss at six months in BND 600, BND 1,200 and PLB were: (ITT 0.54 vs. 0.52 vs. 0.72; p=0.21), (PP 0.46 vs. 0.53 vs. 0.72; p=0.12) and (ITT 0.74 vs. 0.74 vs. 1.05; p=0.01), (PP 0.66 vs. 0.73 vs. 1.06; p=0.003), respectively. The MACE rates at nine months among treatment groups were 20.8% vs. 28.6% vs. 25.5% (p=0.54), respectively. CONCLUSIONS This was a negative study with the primary endpoint not being met. However, significant reduction in the in-stent late loss suggests that bindarit probably exerts a favourable action on the vessel wall following angioplasty. Bindarit was well tolerated with a compliance rate of over 90%. A larger study utilising a loading dose and targeting a specific patient cohort may demonstrate more significant results.

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