Rationale and design of the safe and timely antithrombotic removal - ticagrelor (STAR-T) trial: A prospective, multi-center, double-blind, randomized controlled trial evaluating reductions in postoperative bleeding with intraoperative removal of ticagrelor by the drugsorb™-ATR device in patients undergoing cardiothoracic surgery within 48 hours from last ticagrelor dose.

BACKGROUND: Ticagrelor is often administered to patients with acute coronary syndromes. However, when these patients require urgent or emergent cardiothoracic (CT) surgery the presence of ticagrelor significantly increases surgical bleeding. The goal of the current trial is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the DrugSorb-ATR hemoadsorption device for the intraoperative removal of ticagrelor to reduce postoperative bleeding in the above patient population. The Safe and Timely Antithrombotic Removal - Ticagrelor (STAR-T) Trial is a multi-center, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial enrolling patients who require cardiothoracic surgery on cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) within 48 hours of last ticagrelor dose. METHODS: Subjects will be randomized 1:1 to receive either the DrugSorb-ATR device or an identical sham device during CPB. The study will enroll up to 120 subjects at 20 U.S centers, and the primary outcome is the composite of fatal perioperative bleeding, moderate/severe/massive bleeding according to the Universal Definition of Perioperative Bleeding in Cardiac Surgery (UDPB), and 24 hours chest tube drainage. The components of the composite are hierarchically ranked according to clinical significance and the primary analysis will utilize the Win Ratio method. Percent change in ticagrelor levels before and after CPB (drug removal) will be the key secondary endpoint. An independent Clinical Events Committee will adjudicate all clinical endpoints including safety endpoints relating to postoperative thrombotic events. Subjects will be followed through 30 days after the index operation. CONCLUSIONS: The results from STAR-T, if positive, will potentially support FDA market approval for DrugSorb-ATR, and provide a solution to an important unmet clinical need.

Ataluren in patients with nonsense mutation Duchenne muscular dystrophy (ACT DMD): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is a severe, progressive, and rare neuromuscular, X-linked recessive disease. Dystrophin deficiency is the underlying cause of disease; therefore, mutation-specific therapies aimed at restoring dystrophin protein production are being explored. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ataluren in ambulatory boys with nonsense mutation DMD. METHODS: We did this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial at 54 sites in 18 countries located in North America, Europe, the Asia-Pacific region, and Latin America. Boys aged 7-16 years with nonsense mutation DMD and a baseline 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) of 150 m or more and 80% or less of the predicted normal value for age and height were randomly assigned (1:1), via permuted block randomisation (block size of four) using an interactive voice-response or web-response system, to receive ataluren orally three times daily (40 mg/kg per day) or matching placebo. Randomisation was stratified by age (<9 years vs ≥9 years), duration of previous corticosteroid use (6 months to <12 months vs ≥12 months), and baseline 6MWD (<350 m vs ≥350 m). Patients, parents and caregivers, investigational site personnel, PTC Therapeutics employees, and all other study personnel were masked to group allocation until after database lock. The primary endpoint was change in 6MWD from baseline to week 48. We additionally did a prespecified subgroup analysis of the primary endpoint, based on baseline 6MWD, which is reflective of anticipated rates of disease progression over 1 year. The primary analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01826487. FINDINGS: Between March 26, 2013, and Aug 26, 2014, we randomly assigned 230 patients to receive ataluren (n=115) or placebo (n=115); 228 patients comprised the intention-to-treat population. The least-squares mean change in 6MWD from baseline to week 48 was -47·7 m (SE 9·3) for ataluren-treated patients and -60·7 m (9·3) for placebo-treated patients (difference 13·0 m [SE 10·4], 95% CI -7·4 to 33·4; p=0·213). The least-squares mean change for ataluren versus placebo in the prespecified subgroups was -7·7 m (SE 24·1, 95% CI -54·9 to 39·5; p=0·749) in the group with a 6MWD of less than 300 m, 42·9 m (15·9, 11·8-74·0; p=0·007) in the group with a 6MWD of 300 m or more to less than 400 m, and -9·5 m (17·2, -43·2 to 24·2; p=0·580) in the group with a 6MWD of 400 m or more. Ataluren was generally well tolerated and most treatment-emergent adverse events were mild to moderate in severity. Eight (3%) patients (n=4 per group) reported serious adverse events; all except one event in the placebo group (abnormal hepatic function deemed possibly related to treatment) were deemed unrelated to treatment. INTERPRETATION: Change in 6MWD did not differ significantly between patients in the ataluren group and those in the placebo group, neither in the intention-to-treat population nor in the prespecified subgroups with a baseline 6MWD of less than 300 m or 400 m or more. However, we recorded a significant effect of ataluren in the prespecified subgroup of patients with a baseline 6MWD of 300 m or more to less than 400 m. Baseline 6MWD values within this range were associated with a more predictable rate of decline over 1 year; this finding has implications for the design of future DMD trials with the 6-minute walk test as the endpoint. FUNDING: PTC Therapeutics.

Duchenne Regulatory Science Consortium Meeting on Disease Progression Modeling for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy.

INTRODUCTION: The Duchenne Regulatory Science Consortium (D-RSC) was established to develop tools to accelerate drug development for DMD.  The resulting tools are anticipated to meet validity requirements outlined by qualification/endorsement pathways at both the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Administration (EMA), and will be made available to the drug development community. The initial goals of the consortium include the development of a disease progression model, with the goal of creating a model that would be used to forecast changes in clinically meaningful endpoints, which would inform clinical trial protocol development and data analysis.  Methods: In April of 2016 the consortium and other experts met to formulate plans for the development of the model.  Conclusions: Here we report the results of the meeting, and discussion as to the form of the model that we plan to move forward to develop, after input from the regulatory authorities.

Efficacy of Lurasidone in Adults Aged 55 Years and Older With Bipolar Depression: Post Hoc Analysis of 2 Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Studies.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this post hoc analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of lurasidone in patients aged 55 years and older with bipolar depression. METHODS: A post hoc analysis was performed on the older adult subgroup (n = 142) of outpatients meeting DSM-IV-TR criteria for bipolar I depression in 2 placebo-controlled, 6-week, randomized, double-blind studies conducted from 2009-2012: a monotherapy study comparing fixed flexible-dose ranges of lurasidone 20-60 mg/d or 80-120 mg/d with placebo and an adjunctive therapy study comparing flexible doses of lurasidone 20-120 mg/d with placebo adjunctive to either lithium or valproate. The primary endpoint was mean change at week 6 in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. RESULTS: In the randomized sample, the proportion of older adults was 88/505 (17.4%) in the monotherapy study and 54/348 (15.5%) in the adjunctive therapy study. In the older adult subgroup in the monotherapy study, mean change at week 6 in the MADRS was significantly greater for lurasidone versus placebo (-14.8 vs -7.1; P = .003; effect size, 0.83; pooled doses), and in the adjunctive therapy study, mean change for lurasidone was not significantly different from placebo (-13.9 vs -11.1; P = .398; effect size, 0.26). Discontinuation rates due to adverse events for lurasidone versus placebo were similar for the monotherapy (6.8% vs 6.9%) and adjunctive therapy (3.8% vs 7.1%) studies. Lurasidone had minimal effects on metabolic laboratory values. CONCLUSIONS: The results of these post hoc analyses, which assessed the efficacy of lurasidone in older adults with bipolar disorder, found that monotherapy was significantly effective while adjunctive therapy was not associated with significant improvement. Both monotherapy and adjunctive therapy with lurasidone were safe and well-tolerated in this older adult population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00868699, NCT00868452.

Lurasidone adjunctive with lithium or valproate for bipolar depression: A placebo-controlled trial utilizing prospective and retrospective enrolment cohorts.

In this study, designed to evaluate the efficacy of lurasidone as adjunctive therapy with lithium or valproate, patients with bipolar I depression were randomized to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with lurasidone (N = 180) or placebo (N = 176), added to background treatment with lithium or valproate. All patients were treated with lithium or valproate for a minimum of 4 weeks prior to screening. This was confirmed either by prospective treatment after study enrolment (run-in cohort), or retrospectively, with blood levels of lithium and valproate at screening (non-run-in cohort). Primary and key secondary endpoints were change from baseline to week 6 on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and depression severity score on the Clinical Global Impressions scale for use in bipolar illness (CGI-BP-S), respectively. Treatment with lurasidone was associated with non-significant improvement at week 6 vs. placebo for the MADRS total score (-11.8 vs -10.4; P = 0.176), and the CGI-BP-S score (-1.36 vs -1.13; P = 0.095). Significant separation from placebo was observed from weeks 2-5 for the MADRS and weeks 3-5 for the CGI-BP-S. Improvement in the placebo-subtracted MADRS total score was notably larger at week 6 for the non-run-in cohort compared to the run-in cohort (LS mean difference in endpoint change scores, -4.6; P = 0.009). Adverse events most frequently reported for lurasidone were akathisia, somnolence, and extrapyramidal side effects. In conclusion, lurasidone adjunctive with lithium or valproate demonstrated significant improvement in depressive symptoms based on the MADRS from weeks 2-5 but not at the primary week 6 endpoint.

LURASIDONE IN THE LONG-TERM TREATMENT OF PATIENTS WITH BIPOLAR DISORDER: A 24-WEEK OPEN-LABEL EXTENSION STUDY.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of 6 months of open-label, uncontrolled extension treatment with lurasidone in patients with a diagnosis of bipolar depression who completed 6 weeks of acute treatment. METHODS: Patients completing 6 weeks of double-blind placebo-controlled treatment with either lurasidone monotherapy (one study) or adjunctive therapy with lithium or valproate (two studies), were treated for 6 months with flexible doses of lurasidone, 20-120 mg/day, in an open-label, uncontrolled extension study (N = 813; monotherapy, 38.9%; adjunctive therapy, 61.1%). Changes in safety parameters were calculated from double-blind, acute-phase baseline to month 6 of the extension phase, using a last observation carried forward (LOCF endpoint) analysis. RESULTS: Five hundred fifty-nine of 817 (68.4%) patients completed the extension study. In the monotherapy and adjunctive therapy groups, 6.9 and 9.0%, respectively, discontinued due to an adverse event. For the monotherapy and adjunctive therapy groups, respectively, changes from double-blind baseline to month 6 were +0.8 and +0.9 kg for weight (mean), 0.0 and +2.0 mg/dL for total cholesterol (median), +5.0 and +5.0 mg/dL for triglycerides (median), -1.0 and 0.0 mg/dL for glucose (median); -22.6 and -21.7 for Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS; mean); whereas change from open-label baseline to month 6 were +0.85 and +0.88 kg for weight (mean), and -6.9 and -6.5 for MADRS (mean). CONCLUSIONS: Six months of treatment with open-label lurasidone was safe and well tolerated with minimal effect on weight and metabolic parameters; continued improvement in depressive symptoms was observed.

Lurasidone in the treatment of bipolar depression with mixed (subsyndromal hypomanic) features: post hoc analysis of a randomized placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Mixed (subsyndromal hypomanic) features are prevalent in patients with bipolar depression and are associated with more severe and complex illness, including increased risk for suicide attempts, higher switch to mania during antidepressant therapy, and a higher rate of recurrence. The aim of this post hoc analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lurasidone in the treatment of patients with bipolar depression presenting with mixed features. METHOD: Patients with a DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of major depressive episode associated with bipolar I disorder, with or without rapid cycling, and with a Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score ≥ 20 and a Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) score ≤ 12 were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of double-blind, once-daily treatment with lurasidone 20-60 mg, lurasidone 80-120 mg, or placebo. The presence of mixed features was defined as a YMRS score ≥ 4 at study baseline. Efficacy analyses included change in MADRS total score from baseline to week 6 (the primary outcome in the original study, conducted between April 2009 and February 2012). RESULTS: At baseline, mixed features were present in 56% of patients (lurasidone, n = 182/323; placebo, n = 90/162). Treatment with lurasidone (vs placebo) was associated with significantly greater reductions in MADRS scores in the mixed features group (-15.7 vs -10.9; P = .001; week 6; mixed model for repeated measures [MMRM]; effect size, 0.48) and in the group without mixed features (-15.2 vs -10.8; P = .002; week 6; MMRM; effect size, 0.48). Rates of protocol-defined treatment-emergent hypomania or mania were similar for patients with mixed features (lurasidone, 2.2%; placebo, 3.2%) and without mixed features (lurasidone, 3.4%; placebo, 0.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Lurasidone was found in this post hoc analysis to be efficacious in the treatment of patients with bipolar depression who present with mixed features (assessed cross-sectionally at study baseline). No increased risk of treatment-emergent mania was observed in either group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00868699.

Lurasidone monotherapy in the treatment of bipolar I depression: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: The authors evaluated the efficacy and safety of lurasidone in the treatment of patients with major depressive episodes associated with bipolar I disorder. METHOD: Patients were randomly assigned to receive double-blind treatment with lurasidone (20-60 mg/day [N=166] or 80-120 mg/day [N=169]) or placebo (N=170) for 6 weeks. Primary and key secondary endpoints were change from baseline to week 6 on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and depression severity score on the Clinical Global Impressions scale for use in bipolar illness (CGI-BP), respectively. RESULTS: Lurasidone treatment significantly reduced mean MADRS total scores at week 6 for both the 20-60 mg/day group (-15.4; effect size=0.51) and the 80-120 mg/day group (-15.4; effect size=0.51) compared with placebo (-10.7). Similarly, lurasidone treatment resulted in significantly greater endpoint reduction in CGI-BP depression severity scores for both the 20-60 mg/day group (-1.8; effect size=0.61) and the 80-120 mg/day group (-1.7; effect size=0.50) compared with placebo (-1.1). Both lurasidone groups also experienced significant improvements compared with placebo in anxiety symptoms and in patient-reported measures of quality of life and functional impairment. Discontinuation rates due to adverse events were similar in the 20-60 mg/day (6.6%), 80-120 mg/day (5.9%), and placebo (6.5%) groups. The most frequent adverse events associated with lurasidone were nausea, headache, akathisia, and somnolence. Minimal changes in weight, lipids, and measures of glycemic control were observed with lurasidone. CONCLUSION: Monotherapy with lurasidone in the dosage range of 20-120 mg/day significantly reduced depressive symptoms in patients with bipolar I depression. Lurasidone was well tolerated, with few changes in weight or metabolic parameters.

Lurasidone as adjunctive therapy with lithium or valproate for the treatment of bipolar I depression: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE Few studies have been reported that support the efficacy of adjunctive therapy for patients with bipolar I depression who have had an insufficient response to monotherapy with mood-stabilizing agents. The authors investigated the efficacy of lurasidone, a novel antipsychotic agent, as adjunctive therapy with lithium or valproate for the treatment of bipolar I depression. METHOD Patients were randomly assigned to receive 6 weeks of double-blind adjunctive treatment with lurasidone (N=183) or placebo (N=165), added to therapeutic levels of either lithium or valproate. Primary and key secondary endpoints were change from baseline to week 6 on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and depression severity score on the Clinical Global Impressions scale for use in bipolar illness (CGI-BP), respectively. RESULTS Lurasidone treatment significantly reduced mean MADRS total score at week 6 compared with the placebo group (-17.1 versus -13.5; effect size=0.34). Similarly, lurasidone treatment resulted in significantly greater endpoint reduction in CGI-BP depression severity scores compared with placebo (-1.96 versus -1.51; effect size=0.36) as well as significantly greater improvement in anxiety symptoms and in patient-reported measures of quality of life and functional impairment. Discontinuation rates due to adverse events were 6.0% and 7.9% in the lurasidone and placebo groups, respectively. Adverse events most frequently reported for lurasidone were nausea, somnolence, tremor, akathisia, and insomnia. Minimal changes in weight, lipids, and measures of glycemic control were observed during treatment with lurasidone. CONCLUSIONS In patients with bipolar I depression, treatment with lurasidone adjunctive to lithium or valproate significantly improved depressive symptoms and was generally well tolerated.

Antiviral activity of single-dose PRO 140, a CCR5 monoclonal antibody, in HIV-infected adults.

BACKGROUND: The current goal of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) therapy is to maximally suppress viral replication. Securing this goal requires new drugs and treatment classes. The chemokine receptor CCR5 provides an entry portal for HIV-1, and PRO 140 is a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to CCR5 and potently inhibits CCR5-tropic (R5) HIV-1 in vitro. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-escalating study was conducted in 39 individuals with HIV-1 RNA levels or =5000 copies/mL, CD4(+) cell counts > or =250 cells/microL, no antiretroviral therapy for 3 months, and only R5 HIV-1 detectable. Cohorts were randomized 3:10 to receive placebo or doses of PRO 140 of 0.5, 2, or 5 mg/kg. Subjects were monitored for 58 days for safety, antiviral effects, and serum concentrations of PRO 140. RESULTS: PRO 140 was generally well tolerated and demonstrated potent, rapid, prolonged, and dose-dependent antiviral activity. Mean reductions in HIV-1 RNA level of 0.58 log(10), 1.20 log(10) (P= .0002) and 1.83 log(10) (P= .0001) were observed for the 0.5-, 2-, and 5-mg/kg dose groups, respectively. Reductions in mean viral load of > or =10-fold were observed within 4 days and persisted for 2-3 weeks after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This trial established clear proof of concept for PRO 140 as a potent antiretroviral agent with extended activity after a single dose. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Register: ISRCTN45537485 .

Development and validation of a web-based neuropsychological test protocol for sports-related return-to-play decision-making.

The Concussion Resolution Index (CRI) is an online assessment tool designed to track resolution of symptoms following sports-related concussion. The CRI is composed of six subtests measuring reaction time, visual recognition, and speed of information processing. Three factors are derived from the subtests: Simple Reaction Time (SRT), Complex Reaction Time (CRT), and Processing Speed (PS). Multiple alternate forms within subtests afford simple, reliable, assessment of change, relative to a baseline test completed by an athlete. The test also assesses self-reported neurophysiological symptoms at the time of injury and tracks resolution of these symptoms. The data demonstrate the CRI is a valid and reliable measure of cognitive performance in a relatively heterogeneous group of athletes aged 13-35. Two methods of statistical analysis for assessing change from baseline were compared to establish a psychometric basis for return-to-play decision-making: the Reliable Change Index (RCI) and multiple regression. Multiple regression was more accurate than the RCI in determining a decline in performance relative to the baseline.

Acute psychological stress induces a prolonged suppression of the production of reactive oxygen species by phagocytes.

Possible effects of psychological stress on the function of phagocytic cells have thus far hardly been investigated. In this study, we examined the phagocytic production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) in 10 healthy subjects undergoing a brief mental stressor. In a crossover design, the same subjects served as their own unstressed controls on a second experimental date. The acute laboratory stress resulted in a suppressed circadian rhythm of ROS production and in a decreased overall formation of ROS throughout the day. Especially under conditions of chronic stress, this finding may be of importance for the host's defense against infectious diseases.