307 research outputs found

    Fluvoxamine for fatigue in primary biliary cirrhosis and primary sclerosing cholangitis: a randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN88246634]

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Fatigue is a major clinical problem in many patients with primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) and primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC). An effective treatment has not been defined. Recently, a large proportion of patients with these diseases was found to have symptoms of depression. Because fatigue is a frequent symptom of depression and there is some evidence that treatment with an antidepressant improves fatigue in patients with fibromyalgia, we hypothesised that the antidepressant fluvoxamine might improve fatigue related to PBC and PSC. METHODS: Fatigued patients were randomised to receive fluvoxamine (75 mg BID) or placebo for a six-week period. Fatigue and quality of life were quantified using a visual analogue scale, the Fisk Fatigue Severity Scale, the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory and the SF-36. RESULTS: Seventeen and 16 patients were allocated to fluvoxamine and placebo, respectively. There was no statistically significant beneficial effect of fluvoxamine on fatigue or quality of life. The median VAS scores in the fluvoxamine and placebo groups were 7.40 and 7.45 at day 0, 6.9 and 7.15 at day 14, 7.45 and 7.65 at day 42 and 7.8 and 8.0 four weeks after treatment discontinuation. CONCLUSION: We found no evidence for a beneficial effect of fluvoxamine on fatigue in these patients with cholestatic liver disease and severe chronic fatigue

    Disproportionate articular pain is a frequent phenomenon in rheumatoid arthritis and responds to treatment with sarilumab

    Get PDF
    Objectives In some patients with RA, joint pain is more severe than expected based on the amount of joint swelling [referred to as disproportionate articular pain (DP)]. We assessed DP prevalence and the effects of sarilumab, an IL-6 inhibitor, on DP. Methods Data from RA patients treated with placebo or 200 mg sarilumab in the phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) MOBILITY and TARGET, adalimumab 40 mg or sarilumab 200 mg in the phase 3 RCT MONARCH and sarilumab 200 mg in open-label extensions (OLEs) were used. DP was defined as an excess tender 28-joint count (TJC28) over swollen 28-joint count (SJC28) of ≥7 (TJC28 − SJC28 ≥ 7). Treatment response and disease activity were determined for patients with and without DP. Results Of 1531 sarilumab 200 mg patients from RCTs, 353 (23%) had baseline DP. On average, patients with DP had higher 28-joint DAS using CRP (DAS28-CRP) and pain scores than patients without DP, whereas CRP levels were similar. After 12 and 24 weeks, patients with baseline DP treated with sarilumab were more likely to be DP-free than those treated with placebo or adalimumab. In RCTs, more sarilumab-treated patients achieved low disease activity vs comparators, regardless of baseline DP status. In OLEs, patients were more likely to lose rather than gain DP status. Conclusion About one-quarter of patients with RA experienced DP, which responded well to sarilumab. These data support the concept that other mechanisms (potentially mediated via IL-6) in addition to inflammation may contribute to DP in RA

    Indirect Treatment Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Sarilumab Monotherapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients with Inadequate Response to Conventional Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs

    Get PDF
    Introduction: To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of subcutaneous sarilumab 200 mg monotherapy administered every 2 weeks (q2w) versus other monotherapies of biologic, targeted and conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs, tsDMARDs, csDMARDs) at recommended doses for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in patients who are intolerant of or inadequate responders to csDMARDs (csDMARD-IR). Methods: A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted on 24-week efficacy outcomes: Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score, American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 criteria, and European League Against Rheumatism Disease Activity Score 28-joint count erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28) < 2.6. In addition, serious infections and serious adverse events (SI/SAE) were examined at 24 weeks. Results: Nine trials were selected for the NMA. Sarilumab 200 mg showed superiority versus adalimumab monotherapy on all efficacy outcomes and versus tofacitinib monotherapy on ACR20. Compared with csDMARDs, sarilumab 200 mg showed superiority on ACR 20/50/70 criteria and DAS28 < 2.6 but had similar efficacy on HAQ-DI. Efficacy of sarilumab 200 mg was similar versus certolizumab, etanercept, tofacitinib and tocilizumab 8 mg/kg monotherapy across all efficacy outcomes. SI/SAE appeared similar for sarilumab 200 mg versus all comparators. Conclusion: In csDMARD-IR patients, sarilumab 200 mg monotherapy has superior efficacy and similar safety versus csDMARDs, superior efficacy and similar safety versus adalimumab, and similar efficacy and safety versus bDMARDs and tsDMARDs

    Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of sarilumab combination therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis with inadequate response to conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs or tumour necrosis factor α inhibitors: Systematic literature review and network meta-analyses

    Get PDF
    Objective To compare efficacy and safety of subcutaneous sarilumab 200 mg and 150 mg every 2 weeks plus conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (+csDMARDs) versus other targeted DMARDs+csDMARDs and placebo+csDMARDs, in inadequate responders to csDMARDs (csDMARD-IR) or tumour necrosis factor α inhibitors (TNFi-IR). Methods Systematic literature review and network meta-analyses (NMA) conducted on 24 week efficacy and safety outcomes: Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index, modified total sharp score (mTSS, including 52 weeks), American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70, European League Against Rheumatism Disease Activity Score 28-joint count erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28)<2.6; serious infections/serious adverse events (including 52 weeks). Results 53 trials were selected for NMA. csDMARD-IR: Sarilumab 200 mg+csDMARDs and 150 mg+csDMARDs were superior versus placebo+csDMARDs on all outcomes. Against most targeted DMARDs, sarilumab 200 mg showed no statistically significant differences, except superiority to baricitinib 2 mg, tofacitinib and certolizumab on 24 week mTSS. Sarilumab 150 mg was similar to all targeted DMARDs. TNFi-IR: Sarilumab 200 mg was similar to abatacept, golimumab, tocilizumab 4 mg and 8 mg/kg intravenously and rituximab on ACR20/50/70, superior to baricitinib 2 mg on ACR50 and DAS28<2.6 and to abatacept, golimumab, tocilizumab 4 mg/kg intravenously and rituximab on DAS28<2.6. Sarilumab 150 mg was similar to targeted DMARDs but superior to baricitinib 2 mg and rituximab on DAS28<2.6 and inferior to tocilizumab 8 mg on ACR20 and DAS28<2.6. Serious adverse events, including serious infections, appeared similar for sarilumab versus comparators. Conclusions Results suggest that in csDMARD-IR and TNFi-IR (a smaller network), sarilumab+csDMARD had superior efficacy and similar safety versus placebo+csDMARDs and at least similar efficacy and safety versus other targeted DMARDs+csDMARDs

    Safety and tolerability of subcutaneous sarilumab and intravenous tocilizumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

    Get PDF
    Objectives: Safety and efficacy of mAbs blocking the IL-6 receptor have been established in RA. This is the first analysis examining safety and tolerability of sarilumab and tocilizumab administered as single or multiple doses in patients with RA within the same study. Methods: In ASCERTAIN, patients were randomized 1: 1: 2 to 24 weeks’ double-blind sarilumab 150 or 200 mg every 2 weeks s.c. or tocilizumab 4 mg/kg every 4 weeks i.v., increased to 8 mg/kg if clinically indicated. In Study 1309, patients were randomized 1: 1: 1: 1 to single-dose open-label sarilumab 150 or 200 mg s.c. or tocilizumab 4 or 8 mg/kg i.v. Results: In ASCERTAIN, incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between sarilumab and tocilizumab. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were the following: sarilumab: neutropenia [6 patients (12.2%) in the 150 mg group and 8 (15.7%) in the 200 mg group], nasopharyngitis [6 (12.2%) and 3 (5.9%)], and injection-site erythema [4 (8.2%) and 4 (7.8%)]; tocilizumab: accidental overdose [9 (8.8%)], upper respiratory tract infection [7 (6.9%)] and nausea [7 (6.9%)]. Laboratory changes in both studies included decreased neutrophils and platelets and increased transaminases and lipids. In Study 1309, incidence of absolute neutrophil count <1.0 giga/l was similar between sarilumab and tocilizumab, and occurred more frequently in the higher dose groups. No association between decrease in absolute neutrophil count and increased incidence of infection was observed in either study. Conclusion: No clinically meaningful differences in treatment-emergent adverse events were observed between sarilumab and tocilizumab. Laboratory changes with sarilumab were within the same range as those with tocilizumab

    Efficacy and safety of sarilumab in combination with csDMARDs or as monotherapy in subpopulations of patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis in three phase III randomized, controlled studies

    Get PDF
    Background The interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor sarilumab demonstrated efficacy in combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) or as monotherapy in patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with an inadequate response (IR) or intolerant (INT) to methotrexate (MTX) or tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors. This analysis investigated the efficacy and safety of sarilumab in patient subgroups. Methods Data were included from phase III studies: two placebo-controlled studies of subcutaneous sarilumab 150/200 mg every 2 weeks (q2w) either + MTX in MTX-IR patients (52 weeks) or + csDMARDs in TNF-IR/INT patients (24 weeks), and a monotherapy study of sarilumab 200 mg q2w vs. adalimumab 40 mg q2w in MTX-IR/INT patients (24 weeks). Prespecified and post hoc subgroups included patient demographics, disease characteristics, and prior treatments. Prespecified and post hoc endpoints included clinical, radiographic, and physical function measures, and p values are considered nominal. Safety was assessed during double-blind treatment. Results The superiority of sarilumab (either as monotherapy vs. adalimumab or in combination with csDMARDs vs. placebo + csDMARDs) across clinical endpoints was generally consistent across subgroups defined by patient demographics, disease characteristics, and prior treatments, demonstrating the benefit of sarilumab treatment for a wide range of patient types. Interaction p values of < 0.05 were consistently observed across studies only for baseline anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibody (ACPA) status for American College of Rheumatology 20% response, but not American College of Rheumatology 50% or 70% response. Adverse events and worsening laboratory parameters occurred more frequently in sarilumab-treated vs. placebo-treated patients and were more frequent in the small number of patients ≥ 65 years (n = 289) vs. patients < 65 years (n = 1819). Serious infections occurred in six patients aged ≥ 65 years receiving sarilumab, although the incidence of serious infections was generally higher in patients aged ≥ 65 years regardless of treatment. Conclusions Apart from ACPA status, there were no consistent signals indicating differential effects of sarilumab in any of the subpopulations assessed. Sarilumab demonstrated consistent efficacy and safety across a wide range of patients with RA. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01061736, registered on February 03, 2010; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01709578, registered on October 18, 2012; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02332590, registered on January 07, 2015This study and medical writing support were funded by Sanofi Genzyme and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc

    From transformation to chronification of migraine: Pathophysiological and clinical aspects

    Get PDF
    Chronic migraine is a neurological disorder characterized by 15 or more headache days per month of which at least 8 days show typical migraine features. The process that describes the development from episodic migraine into chronic migraine is commonly referred to as migraine transformation or chronification. Ample studies have attempted to identify factors associated with migraine transformation fr

    From transformation to chronification of migraine : pathophysiological and clinical aspects

    Get PDF
    Chronic migraine is a neurological disorder characterized by 15 or more headache days per month of which at least 8 days show typical migraine features. The process that describes the development from episodic migraine into chronic migraine is commonly referred to as migraine transformation or chronification. Ample studies have attempted to identify factors associated with migraine transformation from different perspectives. Understanding CM as a pathological brain state with trigeminovascular participation where biological changes occur, we have completed a comprehensive review on the clinical, epidemiological, genetic, molecular, structural, functional, physiological and preclinical evidence available
    corecore