Improvement of cancellous bone microstructure in patients on teriparatide following alendronate pretreatment

An increase in procollagen type I amino-terminal propeptide (PINP) early after teriparatide initiation was shown to correlate with increased lumbar spine areal BMD and is a good predictor of the anabolic response to teriparatide. Few data exist correlating PINP and bone microstructure, and no data exist in patients on teriparatide following prior potent antiresorptive treatment. This exploratory analysis aimed to investigate the effects of teriparatide on cancellous bone microstructure and correlations of bone markers with microstructure in alendronate-pretreated patients. This was a post hoc analysis of changes in bone markers and three-dimensional indices of bone microstructure in paired iliac crest biopsies from a prospective teriparatide treatment study in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis who were either treatment-naïve (TN, n = 16) or alendronate-pretreated (ALN, n = 29) at teriparatide initiation. Teriparatide (20 μg/day) was given for 24 months; biopsies were taken at baseline and endpoint, and serum concentrations of PINP and type 1 collagen cross-linked C-telopeptide (βCTX) were measured at intervals up to 24 months. In the TN and ALN groups, respectively, mean (SD) increases in three-dimensional bone volume/tissue volume were 105 (356)% (P = 0.039) and 55 (139)% (P < 0.005) and trabecular thickness 30.4 (30)% (P < 0.001) and 30.8 (53)% (P < 0.001). No significant changes were observed in trabecular number or separation. In the ALN patients, 3-month change of neither PINP nor βCTX correlated with indices of cancellous bone microstructure. However, 12-month changes in biochemical bone markers correlated significantly with improvements in bone volume/tissue volume, r = 0.502 (P < 0.01) and r = 0.378 (P < 0.05), trabecular number, r = 0.559 (P < 0.01) and r = 0.515 (P < 0.01), and reduction of trabecular separation, r = −0.432 (P < 0.05) and r = −0.530 (P < 0.01), for PINP and βCTX, respectively. We conclude that cancellous bone microstructure improved with teriparatide therapy irrespective of prior antiresorptive use

Lasmiditan for the acute treatment of migraine: Subgroup analyses by prior response to triptans.

BACKGROUND: Lasmiditan demonstrated superiority to placebo in the acute treatment of migraine in adults with moderate/severe migraine disability in two similarly designed Phase 3 trials, SAMURAI and SPARTAN. Post-hoc integrated analyses evaluated the efficacy of lasmiditan in patients who reported a good or insufficient response to triptans and in those who were triptan naïve. METHODS: Subgroups of patients reporting an overall response of good or poor/none to the most recent use of a triptan at baseline (defined as good or insufficient responders, respectively) and a triptan-naïve subpopulation were derived from combined study participants randomized to receive lasmiditan 50 mg (SPARTAN only), 100 mg or 200 mg, or placebo, as the first dose. Outcomes including headache pain-freedom, most bothersome symptom-freedom, and headache pain relief 2 hours post-first dose of lasmiditan were compared with placebo. Treatment-by-subgroup analyses additionally investigated whether therapeutic benefit varied according to prior triptan response (good or insufficient). RESULTS: Regardless of triptan response, lasmiditan showed higher efficacy than placebo (most comparisons were statistically significant). Treatment-by-subgroup analyses found that the benefit over placebo of lasmiditan did not vary significantly between patients with a good response and those with an insufficient response to triptans. Lasmiditan also showed higher efficacy than placebo in triptan-naïve patients. CONCLUSIONS: Lasmiditan demonstrated comparable efficacy in patients who reported a good or insufficient response to prior triptan use. Lasmiditan also showed efficacy in those who were triptan naïve. Lasmiditan may be a useful therapeutic option for patients with migraine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: SAMURAI (NCT02439320); SPARTAN (NCT02605174)

A close association of freedom from pain, migraine-related functional disability, and other outcomes: results of a post hoc analysis of randomized lasmiditan studies SAMURAI and SPARTAN

Background: While pain freedom at 2 h is a key primary outcome for current trials for acute treatment of migraine, the relationship between the degree of head pain and other efficacy measures at 2 h has rarely been explored. Following lasmiditan treatment of a migraine attack with moderate or severe head pain, we contrast those who achieve pain freedom with those who achieve mild pain but not pain freedom 2 h post dosing. Methods: Patient-level data were pooled across studies and treatment arms from two Phase 3 trials comparing lasmiditan and placebo, SAMURAI and SPARTAN. This post hoc analysis assessed freedom from the most bothersome symptom (MBS), freedom from migraine-related functional disability (disability), and improved patient global impression of change (PGIC) in patients who achieved 2 h pain freedom compared to those who experienced 2 h mild pain. Mild pain differs from pain relief which is defined as either mild pain or pain freedom. Results: Patients who achieved 2 h pain freedom (N = 913), in comparison with those with 2 h mild pain (N = 864), were significantly more likely to experience MBS freedom (91.9% vs. 44.9%), disability freedom (87.1% and 13.4%), and improved PGIC (86.5% and 31.5%) (p \u3c 0.001 for all combinations). In addition, more patients who were pain free experienced both 2 h MBS freedom and 2 h functional disability freedom (83.6%) compared to those with mild pain (10.8%; p \u3c 0.001). The proportion of patients with pain freedom who did not achieve either MBS or disability freedom (4.6%) was lower than in patients with mild pain (52.4%). Lastly, 55.2% of patients experienced mild pain before disability freedom compared to 72.1% who experienced pain freedom and disability freedom at the same time. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that, at 2 h post treatment, patients who were pain free were more likely to achieve other outcomes including freedom from their MBS, freedom from migraine-related functional disability, and improved PGIC compared to those with mild pain, confirming that 2 h pain freedom is more robustly associated with other clinical outcomes than the 2 h mild pain endpoint. Trial Registration: SAMURAI (NCT02439320); SPARTAN (NCT02605174)

Improvement in Function after Lasmiditan Treatment: Post Hoc Analysis of Data from Phase 3 Studies

Introduction: Migraine is associated with substantial functional impairment and affects many aspects of daily life. Methods: Using data from SAMURAI and SPARTAN (double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 studies) and GLADIATOR (an open-label, phase 3 study enrolling patients who had completed SAMURAI or SPARTAN), we assessed the effects of lasmiditan on migraine-related functional disability at multiple time points from 0.5 to 48 h post dose by asking patients to rate how much the migraine was interfering with normal activities. Pooled data from SAMURAI and SPARTAN (SAMURAI + SPARTAN) and data from GLADIATOR were analyzed using the intention-to-treat populations. Results: For SPARTAN + SAMURAI, significantly more patients who received lasmiditan at any dose versus placebo reported freedom from migraine-related functional disability at every timepoint from 2 h post dose, and this difference persisted to 48 h (p < 0.05). Significant differences from placebo in freedom from migraine-related functional disability commenced at 1 h post dose for lasmiditan 200 mg, 1.5 h for lasmiditan 100 mg, and 2 h for lasmiditan 50 mg. Findings from GLADIATOR supported those from SAMURAI + SPARTAN. Conclusion: All doses of lasmiditan resulted in an improvement in migraine-related functional disability that persisted to 48 h. In SAMURAI + SPARTAN, a significant difference from placebo was observed as early as 1 h post dose. TRIAL REGISTRATION AT CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: SAMURAI (NCT02439320), SPARTAN (NCT02605174), and GLADIATOR (NCT02565186)

Rheumatology Associates of North Alabama

ABSTRACT. Objective. To compare the effects on back pain of teriparatide versus alendronate, we analyzed the reporting of back pain in a head to head comparator trial and a followup study. Methods. In the comparator trial, women were randomized to receive either daily self-injected teriparatide 40 µg plus an oral placebo (n = 73), or daily oral alendronate 10 mg plus self-injected placebo (n = 73). Treatment was for a median 14 months. After completion of the comparator trial, 72% of these patients enrolled in a nontreatment followup study. Adverse events were recorded at each comparator trial visit and followup study visit, and the incidence of new or worsening back pain in each group was compared. Results. During the comparator trial, compared with women randomized to alendronate 10 mg, women randomized to teriparatide 40 µg had reduced risk for any back pain (relative risk 0.27, 95% CI 0.09-0.82) and moderate or severe back pain (relative risk 0.19, 95% CI 0.04-0.86). The differences in the reporting of back pain between the teriparatide treated women and the alendronate treated women were sustained during an interval including the comparator trial plus 18 additional months. During an interval including the comparator trial plus 30 additional months, teriparatide treated patients had numerically fewer occurrences of back pain and moderate or severe back pain. Conclusion. Compared with women randomized to alendronate 10 mg, women randomized to teriparatide 40 µg had reduced risk of back pain during the trial and 2.5 years of followup. (J Rheumatol 2005;32:1556-62

Issues Impacting Adverse Event Frequency and Severity : Differences Between Randomized Phase 2 and Phase 3 Clinical Trials for Lasmiditan

We explore factors that may have contributed to differences in treatment-emergent adverse events in the phase 2 and phase 3 lasmiditan clinical trials. Phase 2 and phase 3 trials showed that the centrally penetrant 5-HT agonist, lasmiditan, was effective; higher frequency and severity of adverse events (AEs) were seen in phase 2. This work represents a hybrid of a review of primary documents and study reports with additional post hoc analyses. Protocols, informed consents, data collection forms, and methodologies were reviewed. This information was supplemented by results from the clinical study reports and post hoc analyses of individual patient data from each trial. For lasmiditan 100 and 200 mg, in phase 2, the incidence of ≥1 AE was 72-86% (26% severe), while in phase 3 was 36-43% (2% severe). The most common AEs in all studies were CNS-related. The phase 2 consent form was more descriptive of AEs than phase 3. In phase 2, patients recorded AEs and severity in a paper diary that warned about drowsiness and dizziness. In phase 3, patients recorded in electronic diaries whether they experienced unusual feelings after dosing with lasmiditan that they had not felt with a migraine before, and were contacted to determine if an AE had occurred. In phase 2, the AE Schwindel was variably translated from German as "vertigo" or "dizziness," while phase 3 vertigo cases were queried to ensure there was a sensation of rotation or movement. History of recurrent dizziness and/or vertigo was exclusionary in phase 3. This work illustrates how informed consent wording, AE collection methods, translation, exclusion criteria, and other factors may be important determinants for reporting of the frequency and severity of AEs in clinical trials