Incidence of hypersensitivity and anaphylaxis with sugammadex.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the incidence of hypersensitivity and anaphylaxis after administration of sugammadex. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTING: Sugammadex clinical development program and post-marketing experience. PATIENTS: Surgical patients and healthy volunteers who received sugammadex or placebo/comparator with anesthesia and/or neuromuscular blockade (NMB). INTERVENTIONS: Sugammadex administered as 2.0 mg/kg at reappearance of the second twitch, 4.0 mg/kg at 1-2 post-tetanic count, or 16.0 mg/kg at 3 min after rocuronium 1.2 mg/kg. MEASUREMENTS: Three analytical methods were used: 1) automated MedDRA queries; 2) searches of adverse events (AEs) consistent with treatment-related hypersensitivity reactions as diagnosed by the investigator; and 3) a retrospective adjudication of AEs suggestive of hypersensitivity by a blinded, independent adjudication committee (AC). In addition, a search of all post-marketing reports of events of hypersensitivity was performed, and events were retrospectively adjudicated by an independent AC. Anaphylaxis was determined according to Sampson Criterion 1. MAIN RESULTS: The pooled dataset included 3519 unique subjects who received sugammadex and 544 who received placebo. The automated MedDRA query method showed no apparent increase in hypersensitivity or anaphylaxis with sugammadex as compared to placebo or neostigmine. Similarly, there was a low overall incidence of AEs of treatment-related hypersensitivity (<1%), with no differences between sugammadex and placebo or neostigmine. Finally, the retrospective adjudication of AEs suggestive of hypersensitivity showed a low incidence of hypersensitivity (0.56% and 0.21% for sugammadex 2 mg/kg and 4 mg/kg, respectively), with an incidence similar to subjects who received placebo (0.55%). There were no confirmed cases of anaphylaxis in the pooled studies. During post-marketing use, spontaneous reports of anaphylaxis occurred with approximately 0.01% of sugammadex doses. CONCLUSIONS: Subjects who received sugammadex with general anesthesia and/or NMB had a low overall incidence of hypersensitivity, with no apparent increase in hypersensitivity or anaphylaxis with sugammadex as compared to placebo or neostigmine.

Intermittent or daily montelukast versus placebo for episodic asthma in children.

BACKGROUND: No standard, optimal treatment exists for severe intermittent (ie, episodic) asthma in children. However, evidence suggests that both daily and episode-driven montelukast are effective for this phenotype. OBJECTIVE: To assess the regimen-related efficacy of montelukast in treating pediatric episodic asthma. METHODS: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group, 52-week study was performed in children 6 months to 5 years of age comparing placebo with two regimens of montelukast 4 mg: (1) daily; or (2) episode-driven for 12 days beginning with signs/symptoms consistent with imminent cold or breathing problem. The main outcome measure was the number of asthma episodes (symptoms requiring treatment) culminating in an asthma attack (symptoms requiring physician visit, emergency room visit, corticosteroids, or hospitalization). RESULTS: Five hundred eighty-nine patients were randomized to daily montelukast, 591 to intermittent montelukast, and 591 to placebo. Compared with placebo, no significant difference was seen between daily montelukast (P = .510) or intermittent montelukast (P = .884) in the number of asthma episodes culminating in an asthma attack over 1 year. Daily montelukast reduced symptoms over the 12-day treatment period of asthma episodes compared with placebo (P = .045). Beta-agonist use was reduced with both daily (P = .048) and intermittent montelukast (P = .028) compared with placebo. However, because of prespecified rules for multiplicity adjustments (requiring a positive primary endpoint), statistical significance for secondary endpoints cannot be concluded. All treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Montelukast did not reduce the number of asthma episodes culminating in an asthma attack over 1 year in children 6 months to 5 years of age, although numerical improvements occurred in some endpoints.

A randomized, placebo-controlled study of intravenous montelukast in children with acute asthma.

BACKGROUND: Up to 30% of patients require hospitalization for acute asthma despite standard therapy in the emergency department. In adults, intravenous montelukast added to standard therapy significantly improved forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and reduced hospital admissions compared with standard therapy alone. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of intravenous montelukast added to standard therapy in children with acute asthma. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study of children aged 6 to 14 years conducted from August 25, 2005 to March 17, 2008. Patients with an FEV1 of 75% or less of the predicted value after up to 120 minutes of standard therapy (e.g., oxygen, albuterol, inhaled anticholinergics, and systemic oral corticosteroids) were randomized to intravenous montelukast, 5.25 mg (n=145), or placebo (n=131) added to standard therapy. The primary end point was the time-weighted average change in FEV1 during 60 minutes (deltaFEV1[0-60 min]). Secondary end points included the percentage of patients in whom treatment failed (patients who required hospitalization or for whom a decision to discharge was not reached within 2 hours after drug administration) and the change from baseline in modified pulmonary index score after 60 minutes of treatment. RESULTS: Montelukast was not significantly more effective than placebo for deltaFEV1[0-60 min] when added to standard therapy (0.08 vs. 0.07 L; least squares mean, 0.01; 95% confidence interval, -0.06 to 0.08; P = .78). No significant differences were found in the percentages of patients in whom treatment failed or the modified pulmonary index score after 60 minutes. Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of children with acute asthma, intravenous montelukast was not significantly better than placebo in improving FEV1, symptoms, or overall hospital course.

A randomized placebo-controlled study of intravenous montelukast for the treatment of acute asthma.

BACKGROUND: Current treatments for acute asthma provide inadequate benefit for some patients. Intravenous montelukast may complement existent therapies. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate efficacy of intravenous montelukast as adjunctive therapy for acute asthma. METHODS: A total of 583 adults with acute asthma were treated with standard care during a < or = 60-minute screening period. Patients with FEV(1) < or =50% predicted were randomly allocated to intravenous montelukast 7 mg (n = 291) or placebo (n = 292) in addition to standard care. This double-blind treatment period lasted until a decision for discharge, hospital admission, or discontinuation from the study. The primary efficacy endpoint was the time-weighted average change in FEV(1) during 60 minutes after drug administration. Secondary endpoints included the time-weighted average change in FEV(1) at various intervals (10-120 minutes) and percentage of patients with treatment failure (defined as hospitalization or lack of decision to discharge by 3 hours postadministration). RESULTS: Montelukast significantly increased FEV(1) at 60 minutes postdose; the difference between change from baseline for placebo (least-squares mean of 0.22 L; 95% CI, 0.17, 0.27) and montelukast (0.32 L; 95% CI, 0.27, 0.37) was 0.10 L (95% CI, 0.04, 0.16). Similar improvements in FEV(1)-related variables were seen at all time points (all P <.05). Although treatment failure did not differ between groups (OR 0.92; 95% CI, 0.63, 1.34), a prespecified subgroup analysis suggests likely benefit for intravenous montelukast at US sites. CONCLUSION: Intravenous montelukast added to standard care in adults with acute asthma produced significant relief of airway obstruction throughout the 2 hours after administration, with an onset of action as early as 10 minutes.