Long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of duloxetine in the treatment of fibromyalgia.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of duloxetine in patients with fibromyalgia. METHODS: We report results from the 6-month extension phases of 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials having 6-month placebo-controlled phases. In Study 1, all patients received duloxetine 120 mg/d after 28 weeks on placebo or duloxetine 60 or 120 mg/d. In Study 2, patients taking placebo were titrated to duloxetine 60 mg/d after 27 weeks on treatment, while duloxetine-treated patients remained on their dosages of 60 or 120 mg/d. Safety and tolerability were assessed via discontinuation rates, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), and changes in vital signs and laboratory measures. The primary efficacy measure was the Brief Pain Inventory average pain severity score. RESULTS: The percentage of patients entering and completing the extension phase was 56% (156/278) for Study 1 and 69% (140/204) for Study 2. Groups titrating from placebo to duloxetine showed the highest discontinuation rates due to an adverse event (Study 1, 25%; Study 2, 19%) and TEAE rates (Study 1, 82%; Study 2, 77%). The most common TEAEs were nausea and dry mouth. No significant within-group changes in blood pressure occurred in any group. Significant within-group mean increases in pulse (bpm) were observed in the placebo/duloxetine 120 mg group in Study 1 (3.7 [SD = 11.2], P

Predictors of relapse in a study of duloxetine treatment in patients with major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: Using data from a relapse prevention study of duloxetine treatment for adults with major depressive disorder (MDD), we examined demographic- and illness-related variables to identify factors that may predict relapse of MDD. METHODS: Post-hoc analyses, using the Cox proportional hazards model, were performed on data from a study designed to compare the time to relapse of MDD in duloxetine- and placebo-treated patients. Patients received open-label duloxetine 60 mg/day during a 12-week acute phase, and those who met response criteria were randomly assigned to duloxetine 60 mg/day (N=136) or placebo (N=142) during a 26-week double-blind continuation phase. RESULTS: Significant predictors of relapse were VAS back pain score at entry >30, HAMD(17) total score at randomization >7, and geography (Europe vs. US). Four significant treatment-by-predictor interactions were identified: the SQ-SS pain subscale score at entry>median of 4, VAS overall pain score at entry >30, VAS overall pain score at entry>median of 26, and VAS overall pain score at randomization>median of 7. In the "greater severity" category, the risk of relapse was significantly lower for duloxetine-treated patients compared with placebo-treated patients. LIMITATIONS: These were post-hoc analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Higher levels of pain severity and depressive symptoms and a US geographical location were significant predictors of relapse in patients with MDD.

Safety and tolerability of duloxetine at 60 mg once daily in elderly patients with major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and tolerability profile of duloxetine versus placebo in elderly (> or = 65 years) patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Patients were randomized (2:1) to duloxetine 60 mg/d (once daily) (n = 207) or placebo (n = 104) for 8 weeks. Safety and tolerability measures were analyzed in the total cohort of patients, as well as in subgroups defined by age and preexisting hypertension. RESULTS: Patients had a median age of 72 years (65-90 years). No deaths occurred in the study. Discontinuation rates due to adverse events were similar for duloxetine and placebo (9.7% vs 8.7%). Treatment-emergent dry mouth, nausea, and diarrhea occurred significantly (P < or = 0.05) more frequently with duloxetine compared with placebo. Changes in supine and standing blood pressure (BP) and pulse and in corrected QT (QTc) interval were not significantly different between duloxetine and placebo, except for change in orthostatic systolic BP (-2.45 vs 0.93 mm Hg; P = .017). Incidences of sustained elevation in BP and treatment-emergent orthostatic hypotension were similar for duloxetine compared with placebo (0.5% vs 1.0% and 15.6% vs 20.5%, respectively). The duloxetine group showed significant weight loss compared with the placebo group (-0.73 kg vs -0.13 kg; P = 0.009). Of 5 hepatic analytes, the only significant difference was an increase in alkaline phosphatase in duloxetine compared with placebo (P = 0.017); this difference was not considered clinically relevant. The incidence of 1 or more discontinuation-emergent adverse events was not significantly different between the duloxetine and placebo groups (17.3% vs 11.3%). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that duloxetine is safe and well tolerated in elderly patients with major depressive disorder.

A six-month double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial of duloxetine for the treatment of fibromyalgia.

OBJECTIVE: Assess the efficacy of duloxetine 60/120 mg (N = 162) once daily compared with placebo (N = 168) in the treatment of patients with fibromyalgia, during six months of treatment. METHODS: This was a phase-III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study assessing the efficacy and safety of duloxetine. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between treatment groups on the co-primary efficacy outcome measures, change in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) average pain severity from baseline to endpoint (P = 0.053) and the Patient's Global Impressions of Improvement (PGI-I) at endpoint (P = 0.073). Duloxetine-treated patients improved significantly more than placebo-treated patients on the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire pain score, BPI least pain score and average interference score, Clinical Global Impressions of Severity scale, area under the curve of pain relief, Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory mental fatigue dimension, Beck Depression Inventory-II total score, and 36-item Short Form Health Survey mental component summary and mental health score. Nausea was the most common treatment-emergent adverse event in the duloxetine group. Overall discontinuation rates were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although duloxetine 60/120 mg/day failed to demonstrate significant improvement over placebo on the co-primary outcome measures, in this supportive study, duloxetine demonstrated significant improvement compared with placebo on numerous secondary measures.

Duloxetine in practice-based clinical settings: assessing effects on the emotional and physical symptoms of depression in an open-label, multicenter study.

OBJECTIVE: In placebo-controlled clinical trials, duloxetine has been shown to be effective and well-tolerated in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). However, patients in registration trials may not be representative of patients in clinical practice. This study sought to assess the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of duloxetine in diverse populations of outpatients with MDD. METHOD: This open-label study recruited out-patients ≥ 18 years of age with DSM-IV MDD in primary care or psychiatric practice settings and treated them with duloxetine 60 mg q.d. for 7 weeks. Primary outcome measures were (1) the physicianrated Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale, (2) the patient-rated 28-item Somatic Symptom Inventory (SSI-28) average, and (3) the patient-rated 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report. Quality of life, disability, and vital signs also were assessed. The first patient visit was August 16, 2004. The last patient visit was January 7, 2005. RESULTS: Of 3543 outpatients enrolled, 3431 received at least 1 dose of duloxetine, of whom 71.4% completed the study. Most patients were Caucasian (90.8%) and female (75.4%); mean age was 48 years. Duloxetine significantly (p < .001) improved all efficacy measures in all treated patients as well as in subgroups based on gender, ethnic origin, age, and patient care setting. Except for the SSI-28 average, all the efficacy measures were in favor of female gender and primary care subgroups. Overall, 10.8% of patients discontinued due to adverse events. CONCLUSION: Duloxetine 60 mg q.d. was effective, regardless of gender, ethnic origin, age, and patient care settings, in this 7-week open-label study and was well-tolerated in a diverse population of outpatients with MDD. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00479726.

Efficacy of duloxetine on cognition, depression, and pain in elderly patients with major depressive disorder: an 8-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study compared the effects of duloxetine, 60 mg/day, versus placebo on cognition, depression, and pain in elderly patients with recurrent major depressive disorder. METHOD: Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to duloxetine, 60 mg/day (N=207), or placebo (N=104) for 8 weeks in a double-blind study. The primary outcome measure was a prespecified composite cognitive score composed of four individual tests. Secondary measures included the Geriatric Depression Scale, the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, the Visual Analogue Scale assessing pain, and standard safety and tolerability assessments. RESULTS: Patients had a median age of 72 years (range=65-90). Duloxetine demonstrated significantly greater improvement in the composite cognitive score versus placebo (least-squares mean change from baseline to endpoint: 1.95 versus 0.76), driven by improved verbal learning and memory. Duloxetine treatment showed significantly greater baseline-to-endpoint reductions in both Hamilton depression scale (-6.49 versus -3.72) and Geriatric Depression Scale (-4.07 versus -1.34) total scores compared with placebo. Hamilton depression scale response (37.3% versus 18.6%) and remission (27.4% versus 14.7%) rates at endpoint were significantly higher for duloxetine than for placebo. Duloxetine significantly improved Visual Analogue Scale scores for back pain and time in pain while awake versus placebo. Significantly fewer patients receiving duloxetine withdrew from the study because of lack of efficacy (2.9% versus 9.6%); the incidences of discontinuation due to adverse events were similar for duloxetine and placebo (9.7% versus 8.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Duloxetine improved cognition, depression, and some pain measures and was safe and well tolerated in elderly patients with recurrent major depressive disorder.

Efficacy and tolerability of duloxetine treatment in elderly patients with major depressive disorder and concurrent anxiety symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of duloxetine 60mg/day versus placebo in treating elderly patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and concurrent anxiety symptoms. METHODS: Patients (>/=65) were randomized to eight weeks of treatment with duloxetine 60mg/day (n=207) or placebo (n=104). Anxiety measures were analyzed for all patients, by age (<75 and >/=75), and in patients having concurrent high anxiety (HAMD(17), item 10; Psychic Anxiety baseline score of 2, 3, or 4). Psychic Anxiety, Somatic Anxiety item 11, and the Anxiety/Somatization subscale were analyzed for all patients and subgroups by mean change from baseline to endpoint and repeated measures. Tolerability was assessed via treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), and adverse events were reported as the reason for discontinuation. The analyses presented are primarily post hoc in nature. RESULTS: Duloxetine produced significantly greater reductions than placebo in Psychic Anxiety (least-squares mean change: -0.62 vs. -0.18, p<0.001) and the Anxiety/Somatization subscale (-1.88 vs. -0.99, p=0.002). Repeated measures analyses showed separation between the treatment groups beginning at Week 1 for Psychic Anxiety and Week 4 for the Anxiety/Somatization subscale. Significant improvement occurred in the <75 and >/=75 age groups for Psychic Anxiety, but only the <75 group for the Anxiety/Somatization subscale. Duloxetine-treated patients with high anxiety showed significant improvement compared with placebo-treated patients on Psychic Anxiety, Anxiety/Somatization subscale, the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD(17)) total score, and several other measures. Duloxetine and placebo had similar TEAE rates and discontinuation rates due to adverse events. CONCLUSION: Duloxetine (60mg/day) was efficacious and tolerable in elderly patients with MDD and concurrent anxiety symptoms.

Duloxetine in the prevention of relapse of major depressive disorder: double-blind placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Relapse rates may be as high as 50% in people with major depressive disorder (MDD) previously treated to remission. AIMS: Duloxetine, an inhibitor of serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake that is licensed in Europe, the USA and elsewhere for the treatment of depressive episodes, was evaluated with regard to its efficacy, safety and tolerability in the prevention of relapse of MDD. METHOD: Adult out-patients with MDD received duloxetine (60 mg daily) for 12 weeks (n=533). Patients who responded to the drug were then randomised to duloxetine(60 mg daily)(n=136) or or placebo placebo (n=142) for 26 weeks. The primary measure of efficacy was time to relapse. RESULTS: Patients who received duloxetine (60 mg daily) experienced significantly longer times to relapse of MDD, and better efficacy, global well-being, and quality-of-life outcomes compared with patients who received placebo. It should be noted that adverse events which occur in discontinuation may mimic some signs of depressive relapse, and were not specifically elicited in this study. CONCLUSIONS: Duloxetine (60 mg daily) is effective in the prevention of relapse of MDD during continuation treatment.

Effects of the antidepressant duloxetine on body weight: analyses of 10 clinical studies.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of duloxetine, an inhibitor of serotonin and norepinephrine reup-take, on body weight of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHOD: Body weight data were obtained from all 10 phase II and III registration studies of duloxetine in the treatment of MDD, as defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV), performed by Eli Lilly and Company between February 1999 and July 2003. Both acute (8-9 weeks) and long-term (26, 34, and 52 weeks) studies were analyzed. RESULTS: In the acute placebo-controlled studies, duloxetine-treated patients had a mean change of -0.5 kg compared with a change of 0.2 kg for placebo-treated patients (p < .001); no consistent relationship between duloxetine dose and weight change was observed. In placebo-controlled studies including an active comparator arm, similar acute mean weight changes were seen in duloxetine-treated and fluoxetine-treated patients (-0.7 kg vs. -0.6 kg) and in duloxetine-treated and paroxetine-treated patients (-0.3 kg vs. -0.2 kg). During longer-term treatment (34 weeks), mean weight change in patients treated with duloxetine 40 mg b.i.d. was not significantly different from that seen in placebo-treated patients (0.7 kg vs. 0.1 kg), while patients treated with the higher duloxetine dose of 60 mg b.i.d. or with paroxetine gained significantly (p ≤?.05) more weight than placebo-treated patients (0.9 kg, 1.0 kg, and 0.1 kg, respectively). In a 52-week open-label study, duloxetine-treated patients had a mean weight gain of 1.1 kg at endpoint (p < .001). CONCLUSION: Duloxetine-treated patients experienced weight loss after short-term treatment, followed by modest weight gain on longer-term treatment. The size of the weight changes observed suggests that the antidepressant duloxetine has minimal effects on weight for the majority of patients.

Cardiovascular profile of duloxetine, a dual reuptake inhibitor of serotonin and norepinephrine.

This analysis assessed the effects of duloxetine, a dual reuptake inhibitor of serotonin and norepinephrine, on indices of cardiovascular safety, including heart rate, blood pressure (BP), and electrocardiograms (ECGs), in a large group of clinical trial patients with depression. Data were available from 8 double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled (n = 777), and active comparator-controlled depression trials. Duloxetine (n = 1139) doses ranged from 40 to 120 mg/d, and fluoxetine (n = 70) and paroxetine (n = 359) were administered at a dose of 20 mg/d. Patients were treated for 8 to 9 weeks. There was a significant increase for duloxetine compared with placebo for heart rate (1.6 vs. -0.6 beats per minute) and for systolic BP (1.0 vs. -1.2 mm Hg); the difference for diastolic BP (1.1 vs. 0.3) was not significant. There were no significant differences between duloxetine and placebo treatment groups in the incidence of sustained (at least 3 consecutive visits) elevations in systolic (duloxetine 1.0%, placebo 0.4%), diastolic (duloxetine 0.4%, placebo 0.4%), or either (duloxetine 1.3%, placebo 0.8%) BP. Moreover, the effect of duloxetine on mean changes in supine systolic and diastolic BP was not significantly different from that of fluoxetine or paroxetine. Drug-placebo differences in mean changes in electrocardiograms (eg, QTc, PR, and QRS intervals) were neither statistically nor clinically significant, with the exception that duloxetine 120 mg/d had significant decreases in PR and QRS intervals compared with placebo. These data demonstrate that duloxetine has modest effects on heart rate and BP and no clinically meaningful effect on electrocardiogram profiles in a relatively healthy cohort of clinical trial patients. The cardiovascular effects of duloxetine appear to be comparable with medications considered to be first-line options for depression.

Duloxetine in the acute and long-term treatment of major depressive disorder: a placebo- and paroxetine-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Duloxetine is a balanced and potent dual reuptake inhibitor of serotonin (5-HT) and norepinephrine (NE) that has previously been shown to be effective in the acute treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). This placebo-controlled study assesses the safety and efficacy of duloxetine (80 or 120 mg/day) and paroxetine (20 mg QD) during an initial 8-week acute phase and subsequent 6-month continuation phase treatment of MDD. METHOD: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adult outpatients (age >or= 18 years) meeting DSM-IV criteria for MDD received placebo (n = 93), duloxetine 80 mg/day (40 mg BID; n = 95), duloxetine 120 mg/day (60 mg BID; n = 93), or paroxetine (20 mg QD; n = 86) for 8 weeks. Patients who had a >or= 30% reduction from baseline in HAMD(17) total score during the acute phase were allowed to continue on the same (blinded) treatment for a 6-month continuation phase. Efficacy measures included the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD(17)) total score, HAMD(17) subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA), Visual Analog Scales (VAS) for pain, the Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) and Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) scales, the 28-item Somatic Symptom Inventory (SSI), and the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS). Safety and tolerability were assessed using treatment-emergent adverse events, discontinuations due to adverse events, vital signs, ECGs, laboratory tests, and the Arizona Sexual Experiences Scale (ASEX). RESULTS: During the acute phase, patients receiving duloxetine 80 mg/day, duloxetine 120 mg/day, or paroxetine 20 mg QD had significantly greater reductions in HAMD(17) total score compared with placebo. Both duloxetine (80 and 120 mg/day) and paroxetine treatment groups had significantly greater improvement, compared with placebo, in MADRS, HAMA, CGI-S, and PGI-I scales. Estimated probabilities of remission at week 8 for patients receiving duloxetine 80 mg/day (51%), duloxetine 120 mg/day (58%), and paroxetine (47%) were significantly greater compared with those receiving placebo (30%). The rate of discontinuation due to adverse events among duloxetine-treated patients (80 and 120 mg/day) did not differ significantly from the rate in the placebo group. Treatment-emergent adverse events reported significantly more frequently by duloxetine-treated patients than by patients receiving placebo were constipation (80 and 120 mg/day), increased sweating (120 mg/day), and somnolence (120 mg/day). The incidence of acute treatment-emergent sexual dysfunction in duloxetine- and paroxetine-treated patients was 46.5% and 62.8%, respectively. During the 6-month continuation phase, duloxetine (80 and 120 mg/day) and paroxetine treatment groups demonstrated significant improvement in HAMD(17) total score. Treatment-emergent adverse events occurring most frequently in each active treatment group during the continuation phase were viral infection (duloxetine 80 mg/day), diarrhea (duloxetine 120 mg/day), and headache (paroxetine 20 mg QD). CONCLUSION: These data support previous findings that duloxetine is safe, efficacious, and well tolerated in the acute treatment of MDD. Furthermore, these data provide the first demonstration under double-blind, placebo-controlled conditions that the efficacy and tolerability of duloxetine are maintained during chronic treatment.

Duloxetine in the treatment of depression: a double-blind placebo-controlled comparison with paroxetine.

CONTEXT: Major depressive disorder causes significant morbidity and mortality. Current therapies fail to fully treat both emotional and physical symptoms of major depressive disorder. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate duloxetine, a dual reuptake inhibitor of serotonin and norepinephrine, on improvement of emotional and painful physical symptoms. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, evaluation of duloxetine at 40 mg/d (20 mg twice daily) and 80 mg/d (40 mg twice daily) versus placebo and paroxetine 20 mg/d in depressed outpatients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary efficacy measure was the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Visual Analog Scales for pain, Clinical Global Impression of Severity, Patient's Global Impression of Improvement, and Quality of Life in Depression Scale were also used. Safety was evaluated by assessing discontinuation rates, adverse event rates, vital signs, and laboratory tests. RESULTS: Duloxetine 80 mg/d was superior to placebo on mean 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale total change by 3.62 points (95% CI 1.38, 5.86; P = 0.002). Duloxetine at 40 mg/d was also significantly superior to placebo by 2.43 points (95% CI 0.19, 4.66; P = 0.034), while paroxetine was not (1.51 points; 95% CI -0.55, 3.56; P = 0.150). Duloxetine 80 mg/d was superior to placebo for most other measures, including overall pain severity, and was superior to paroxetine on 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale improvement (by 2.39 points; 95% CI 0.14, 4.65; P = 0.037) and estimated probability of remission (57% for duloxetine 80 mg/d, 34% for paroxetine; P = 0.022). The only adverse event reported significantly more frequently for duloxetine 80 mg/d than for paroxetine was insomnia (19.8% for duloxetine 80 mg/d, 8.0% for paroxetine; P = 0.031). Hypertension incidence was not affected by any treatment. CONCLUSION: Duloxetine therapy was efficacious for emotional and physical symptoms of depression, with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor-like profile of side effects.

Adverse mortality effect of central sympathetic inhibition with sustained-release moxonidine in patients with heart failure (MOXCON).

BACKGROUND: The association between sympathetic activation and mortality in chronic heart failure and the favorable effect of beta blocking drugs has raised the possibility of therapeutic efficacy for central sympathetic inhibition with sustained-release (SR) moxonidine, an imidazoline receptor agonist. METHODS: A randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was initiated in 425 centers in 17 countries with a plan to enter 4533 patients with New York Heart Association class II-IV heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction. Moxonidine SR or matching placebo was titrated to a target dose of 1.5 mg BID. The trial was powered to detect a 20% reduction in mortality, which required a total of 724 deaths. FINDINGS: An early increase in death rate and adverse events in the moxonidine SR group led to premature termination of the trial because of safety concerns after 1934 patients were entered. Final analysis revealed 54 deaths (5.5%) in the moxonidine SR group and 32 deaths (3.4%) in the placebo group during the active treatment phase. Survival curves revealed a significantly (P=0.012) worse outcome in the moxonidine SR group. Hospitalization for heart failure, acute myocardial infarction and adverse events were also more frequent in the moxonidine SR group. Plasma norepinephrine was significantly decreased by moxonidine SR (-18.8% from baseline) vs. placebo (+6.9%). INTERPRETATION: Early termination of the trial limited conclusions regarding the long-term effects of central sympathetic inhibition. Nonetheless, the excess early mortality and morbidity suggest the likelihood of an adverse effect of moxonidine SR and raise concerns regarding the efficacy of generalized sympathetic inhibition in heart failure.

Effects of sustained-release moxonidine, an imidazoline agonist, on plasma norepinephrine in patients with chronic heart failure.

BACKGROUND: In chronic heart failure, sympathetic activation is increased. Moxonidine acts on central nervous system receptors to decrease sympathetic activation. We investigated the dose-response relationship of a new sustained-release (SR) preparation of moxonidine and the plasma concentration of norepinephrine in patients with chronic heart failure. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 268 patients with chronic heart failure in NYHA functional class II to IV on optimal standard therapy were randomized to placebo or 1 of 5 doses of moxonidine SR: 0.3, 0.6, 0.9, 1.2, or 1.5 mg BID. After a dose-titration phase (7 weeks), patients were followed up for another 12 weeks at their maximally tolerated dose. Blood samples for plasma norepinephrine were collected at baseline and weekly during the initial 7 weeks, at week 19, and at the end of the study. At baseline and 7 and 19 weeks, sampling was also done 4 hours after the dose. After the active phases of the study, plasma norepinephrine was evaluated for an additional 3 days. A marked, statistically significant dose-related decrease in plasma norepinephrine was observed for predose levels as well as 4 hours after the dose at week 19. At the highest dose (1.5 mg BID), the trough reduction in norepinephrine was 52%. These reductions were accompanied by a modest decrease in heart rate, a modest increase in left ventricular ejection fraction, and a dose-related increase in adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Plasma norepinephrine was markedly reduced in a dose-related manner by moxonidine SR. This reduction was accompanied by evidence of reverse remodeling, but also by an increase in adverse events.