Progression from Prodromal Alzheimer's Disease to Mild Alzheimer's Disease Dementia in the Verubecestat APECS Study: Adjudicating Diagnostic Transitions.

BACKGROUND: Delay of progression from prodromal Alzheimer's disease (AD) to dementia is an important outcome in AD trials. Centralized adjudication is intended to improve the consistency of dementia diagnosis but has not been scrutinized. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate centralized adjudication for determining progression to dementia compared with Site Investigator opinion or change in Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR). METHODS: We used data from the 2-year APECS trial of verubecestat versus placebo in 1,451 prodromal AD participants. Cases were triggered for central adjudication if: 1) the Site Investigator judged the participant had progressed to dementia, or 2) the participant's CDR sum-of-boxes score increased ≥2 points from baseline. Post-hoc analyses were performed on pooled treatment-group data to compare methods of assessing progression. RESULTS: 581/1,451 (40%) participants had changes triggering adjudication and most (83%) were confirmed as progression to dementia. Only 66% of those who met CDR criteria (regardless of whether they also met Site Investigator criteria) were adjudicated to have progressed to dementia and just 15% of those who met only CDR criteria were adjudicated to have progressed, representing 5% of progressors. In contrast, 99% of those who met Site Investigator criteria (regardless of whether they also met CDR criteria) were adjudicated to have progressed, and the same was true for those who met only Site Investigator criteria. CONCLUSION: A positive Site Investigator opinion is an excellent predictor for a positive adjudication decision regarding onset of dementia. Conversely, sole use of CDR sum-of-boxes change ≥2 is inadequate. The benefit of centralized adjudication appears doubtful.

A Model-Based Approach to Bridging Plasma and Dried Blood Spot Concentration Data for Phase 3 Verubecestat Trials.

In-clinic venous dried blood spot (DBS) pharmacokinetic (PK) sampling was incorporated into two phase 3 studies of verubecestat for Alzheimer's disease (EPOCH [NCT01739348] and APECS [NCT01953601]), as a potential alternative to plasma PK sampling. Initially, plasma and DBS PK samples were collected concurrently to better understand the DBS-plasma verubecestat concentration relationship, with the intention of discontinuing DBS or plasma sampling following interim analysis. Following initial analyses and comparison of results with prespecified selection criteria, plasma PK sampling was discontinued; however, a stability issue resulting in generally lower DBS verubecestat concentrations with longer collection-to-assay times was subsequently discovered (associated with non-compliance in DBS sample handling), prompting reintroduction of plasma sampling. To enable inclusion of DBS data in population PK analyses, a conversion algorithm for calculating plasma-equivalent concentrations (accounting for DBS sample instability) was developed using paired (time-matched) plasma and DBS data from the EPOCH study. Verubecestat population PK models developed from pooled phase 1/1b and EPOCH data using either (1) plasma-only data or (2) plasma and plasma-equivalent concentrations (calculated from non-paired DBS samples) yielded similar results. The algorithm robustness was demonstrated using DBS data from paired samples from the APECS study and comparison between plasma and plasma-equivalent concentrations. The population PK model was updated with APECS data (both plasma and, if no plasma sample available, plasma equivalents). The results demonstrated similar PK in the two phase 3 populations and exposures consistent with expectations from phase 1 data. This case study illustrates challenges with employing new sampling techniques in large, global trials and describes lessons learned.

Epidemiology of Treatment-Resistant Depression in the United States.

Background: The prevalence of treatment-resistant depression (TRD) among patients with pharmaceutically treated depression (PTD) varies greatly in publications. The aim of this study is to estimate the prevalence of TRD using 2 large claims databases in the US.Methods: This cross-sectional study used data from the Humana and Optum databases. Patients aged ≥ 18 years who had at least 1 diagnosis of major depressive disorder (ICD-10-CM codes: F32.xx, F33.xx) and 1 antidepressant prescription filled in 2018 were identified as having PTD. Among patients with PTD, TRD was defined as experiencing failure of treatment with at least 2 antidepressants with ≥ 4 weeks of adequate treatment. We estimated the age- and gender-standardized prevalence of TRD and then used logistic regression to investigate if TRD risk varies by age, sex, race, and geographic region. Finally, we described the timeline of TRD development in incident PTD patients.Results: We identified 296,055 and 277,941 patients with PTD in the Humana and Optum databases, among whom 17,640 (6.0%) and 16,131 (5.8%) had TRD. After age and sex standardization, TRD prevalence among PTD patients was 6.8% in Humana vs 5.8% in Optum. Females, middle-aged adults, and White patients had higher risk of TRD. The median time from index antidepressant use to TRD was about 6 months in incident PTD patients.Conclusions: The prevalence of TRD among patients with PTD was similar in the 2 databases. TRD prevalence varies by sex, race, and age, with a higher prevalence in females, White patients, and those in the age group of 45-64 years. However, the absolute differences were small.

Retinal Optical Coherence Tomography Metrics Are Unchanged in Verubecestat Alzheimer's Disease Clinical Trial but Correlate with Baseline Regional Brain Atrophy.

BACKGROUND: We performed exploratory analyses of retinal thickness data from a clinical trial of the AßPP cleaving enzyme (BACE) inhibitor verubecestat in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate: 1) possible retinal thickness changes following BACE inhibition; and 2) possible association between retinal thickness and brain atrophy. METHODS: Retinal thickness was measured using spectral-domain optical coherence tomography in a 78-week randomized placebo-controlled trial of verubecestat in 1,785 patients with mild-to-moderate AD. Changes from baseline in retinal pigment epithelium, macular grid retinal nerve fiber layer, central subfield retinal thickness, and macular grid volume were evaluated for verubecestat versus placebo. Correlation analyses were performed to investigate the potential association between macular grid retinal nerve fiber layer and central subfield retinal thickness with brain volumetric magnetic resonance imaging (vMRI) data at baseline, as well as correlations for changes from baseline at Week 78 in patients receiving placebo. RESULTS: Verubecestat did not significantly alter retinal thickness during the trial compared with placebo. At baseline, mean macular grid retinal nerve fiber layer and central subfield retinal thickness were weakly but significantly correlated (Pearson's r values≤0.23, p-values < 0.01) with vMRI of several brain regions including whole brain, hippocampus, and thalamus. At Week 78, correlations between retinal thickness and brain vMRI changes from baseline in the placebo group were small and mostly not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: BACE inhibition by verubecestat was not associated with adverse effects on retinal thickness in patients with mild-to-moderate AD. Correlations between retinal thickness and brain volume were observed at baseline. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01739348 (registered December 3, 2012; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01739348).

Cognitive outcomes in trials of two BACE inhibitors in Alzheimer's disease.

INTRODUCTION: The APECS and AMARANTH trials showed that beta-secretase (BACE) inhibitors verubecestat and lanabecestat failed to slow cognitive and functional decline in individuals with prodromal or early Alzheimer's disease. Here, the performance on secondary and exploratory cognitive measures in both studies is reported. METHODS: APECS (verubecestat) and AMARANTH (lanabecestat) were randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, 104-week clinical trials conducted by different sponsors. Measures included the 3-Domain Composite Cognition Score (CCS-3D), Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS), Letter/Category Fluency, and Digit Symbol Coding. RESULTS: Verubecestat showed worsening on the CCS-3D Total Score, Episodic Memory, and Attention/Processing Speed domains. Lanabecestat showed worsening on the RBANS Total Score, Immediate Memory, and Visuospatial/Constructional Indexes. Both BACE inhibitors showed worsening on Digit Symbol Coding and improvements on Letter/Category Fluency. DISCUSSION: In both studies, many measures showed treatment-associated cognitive worsening, whereas verbal fluency tasks showed improvement.

Further analyses of the safety of verubecestat in the phase 3 EPOCH trial of mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: Verubecestat, a BACE1 inhibitor that reduces Aß levels in the cerebrospinal fluid of humans, was not effective in a phase 3 trial (EPOCH) of mild-to-moderate AD and was associated with adverse events. To assist in the development of BACE1 inhibitors, we report detailed safety findings from EPOCH. METHODS: EPOCH was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 78-week trial evaluating verubecestat 12 mg and 40 mg in participants with mild-to-moderate AD diagnosed clinically. The trial was terminated due to futility close to its scheduled completion. Of 1957 participants who were randomized and took treatment, 652 were assigned to verubecestat 12 mg, 652 to verubecestat 40 mg, and 653 to placebo. Adverse events and relevant laboratory, vital sign, and ECG findings were assessed. RESULTS: Verubecestat 12 mg and 40 mg were associated with an increase in the percentage of participants reporting adverse events versus placebo (89 and 92% vs. 82%), although relatively few participants discontinued treatment due to adverse events (8 and 9% vs. 6%). Adverse events that were increased versus placebo included falls and injuries, suicidal ideation, weight loss, sleep disturbance, rash, and hair color change. Most were mild to moderate in severity. Treatment differences in suicidal ideation emerged within the first 3 months but did not appear to increase after 6 months. In contrast, treatment differences in falls and injuries continued to increase over time. CONCLUSIONS: Verubecestat was associated with increased risk for several types of adverse events. Falls and injuries were notable for progressive increases over time. While the mechanisms underlying the increased adverse events are unclear, they may be due to BACE inhibition and should be considered in future clinical development programs of BACE1 inhibitors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01739348 , registered on 29 November 2012.

Randomized Trial of Verubecestat for Prodromal Alzheimer's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Prodromal Alzheimer's disease offers an opportunity to test the effect of drugs that modify the deposition of amyloid in the brain before the onset of dementia. Verubecestat is an orally administered ß-site amyloid precursor protein-cleaving enzyme 1 (BACE-1) inhibitor that blocks production of amyloid-beta (Aß). The drug did not prevent clinical progression in a trial involving patients with mild-to-moderate dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 104-week trial to evaluate verubecestat at doses of 12 mg and 40 mg per day, as compared with placebo, in patients who had memory impairment and elevated brain amyloid levels but whose condition did not meet the case definition of dementia. The primary outcome was the change from baseline to week 104 in the score on the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale-Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB; scores range from 0 to 18, with higher scores indicating worse cognition and daily function). Secondary outcomes included other assessments of cognition and daily function. RESULTS: The trial was terminated for futility after 1454 patients had been enrolled; 485 had been assigned to receive verubecestat at a dose of 12 mg per day (the 12-mg group), 484 to receive verubecestat at a dose of 40 mg per day (the 40-mg group), and 485 to receive placebo. A total of 234 patients, 231 patients, and 239 patients per group, respectively, completed 104 weeks of the trial regimen. The estimated mean change from baseline to week 104 in the CDR-SB score was 1.65 in the 12-mg group, 2.02 in the 40-mg group, and 1.58 in the placebo group (P = 0.67 for the comparison between the 12-mg group and the placebo group and P = 0.01 for the comparison between the 40-mg group and the placebo group), suggesting a worse outcome in the higher-dose group than in the placebo group. The estimated rate of progression to dementia due to Alzheimer's disease was 24.5, 25.5, and 19.3 events per 100 patient-years in the 12-mg group, the 40-mg group, and the placebo group, respectively (hazard ratio for 40 mg vs. placebo, 1.38; 97.51% confidence interval, 1.07 to 1.79, not adjusted for multiple comparisons), favoring placebo. Adverse events were more common in the verubecestat groups than in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Verubecestat did not improve clinical ratings of dementia among patients with prodromal Alzheimer's disease, and some measures suggested that cognition and daily function were worse among patients who received verubecestat than among those who received placebo. (Funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01953601.).

Randomized Trial of Verubecestat for Mild-to-Moderate Alzheimer's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease is characterized by the deposition of amyloid-beta (Aß) plaques in the brain. Aß is produced from the sequential cleavage of amyloid precursor protein by ß-site amyloid precursor protein-cleaving enzyme 1 (BACE-1) followed by γ-secretase. Verubecestat is an oral BACE-1 inhibitor that reduces the Aß level in the cerebrospinal fluid of patients with Alzheimer's disease. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 78-week trial to evaluate verubecestat at doses of 12 mg and 40 mg per day, as compared with placebo, in patients who had a clinical diagnosis of mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease. The coprimary outcomes were the change from baseline to week 78 in the score on the cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-cog; scores range from 0 to 70, with higher scores indicating worse dementia) and in the score on the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study Activities of Daily Living Inventory scale (ADCS-ADL; scores range from 0 to 78, with lower scores indicating worse function). RESULTS: A total of 1958 patients underwent randomization; 653 were randomly assigned to receive verubecestat at a dose of 12 mg per day (the 12-mg group), 652 to receive verubecestat at a dose of 40 mg per day (the 40-mg group), and 653 to receive matching placebo. The trial was terminated early for futility 50 months after onset, which was within 5 months before its scheduled completion, and after enrollment of the planned 1958 patients was complete. The estimated mean change from baseline to week 78 in the ADAS-cog score was 7.9 in the 12-mg group, 8.0 in the 40-mg group, and 7.7 in the placebo group (P=0.63 for the comparison between the 12-mg group and the placebo group and P=0.46 for the comparison between the 40-mg group and the placebo group). The estimated mean change from baseline to week 78 in the ADCS-ADL score was -8.4 in the 12-mg group, -8.2 in the 40-mg group, and -8.9 in the placebo group (P=0.49 for the comparison between the 12-mg group and the placebo group and P=0.32 for the comparison between the 40-mg group and the placebo group). Adverse events, including rash, falls and injuries, sleep disturbance, suicidal ideation, weight loss, and hair-color change, were more common in the verubecestat groups than in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Verubecestat did not reduce cognitive or functional decline in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease and was associated with treatment-related adverse events. (Funded by Merck; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01739348 .).

Effect of within-household reinfestation on design sensitivity.

The effect of within-household reinfestation on design sensitivity is investigated through statistical modeling of the reinfestation process. When reinfestation is present, household randomization tends to magnify treatment differences when compared with individual randomization or a randomized blocking design in the simple setting of two patients per household. The effect of reinfestation under more general household randomization settings is investigated by determining the relationship between the treatment effect and the number of patients per household. In an actual clinical study of treatment for head lice infestation, household randomization with proper stratification was adopted. The results from the study were consistent with theoretical expectations. This seeming contradiction to the blocking principle demonstrates the need to check whether all conditions are met before applying standard design principles.

An observer-blinded study of 1% permethrin creme rinse with and without adjunctive combing in patients with head lice.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if NIX (Warner Lambert Healthcare, Morris Plains, NJ) 1% Permethrin Creme Rinse Lice Treatment (1% PLT) without combing will effectively treat >/=95% of patients on day 2 or on day 15; to determine whether combing influences efficacy. STUDY DESIGN: A randomized, observer-blinded study enrolled 95 infested adults and children. All patients were treated with 1% PLT on day 1 and, if still infested, on day 8. One third of households were randomized to the combing group and two thirds to the no-combing group. Efficacy was assessed by: (1) visual inspection on days 1, 2, 8, 9, and 15 and, (2) shampooing/straining on days 2, 9, and 15. The target efficacy was 95%. RESULTS: In the no-combing group, the lice-free rate was 83.1% on day 2 (95% CI, 71.0-91.6), 45.8% on day 8 (before second treatment) (95% CI, 32.7-59.2), 77.6% on day 9 (95% CI, 64.7-87.5), and 78.3% on day 15 (95% CI, 65.8-87.9). Adjunctive combing did not improve efficacy on any day. CONCLUSIONS: In this population, 1% PLT was significantly less than 95% effective and suggests resistance to 1% PLT. The failure of nit removal combing by nonprofessional caregivers to improve efficacy demonstrates the unreliability of combing as adjunctive treatment in this setting.

Safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of escalating high doses of ivermectin in healthy adult subjects.

Safety and pharmacokinetics (PK) of the antiparasitic drug ivermectin, administered in higher and/or more frequent doses than currently approved for human use, were evaluated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose escalation study. Subjects (n = 68) were assigned to one of four panels (3:1, ivermectin/placebo): 30 or 60 mg (three times a week) or 90 or 120 mg (single dose). The 30 mg panel (range: 34 7-594 microg/kg) also received a single dose with food after a 1-week washout. Safety assessments addressed both known ivermectin CNS effects and general toxicity. The primary safety endpoint was mydriasis, accurately quantitated by pupillometry. Ivermectin was generally well tolerated, with no indication of associated CNS toxicity for doses up to 10 times the highest FDA-approved dose of 200 microg/kg. All dose regimens had a mydriatic effect similar to placebo. Adverse experiences were similar between ivermectin and placebo and did not increase with dose. Following single doses of 30 to 120 mg, AUC and Cmax were generally dose proportional, with t(max) approximately 4 hours and t1/2 approximately 18 hours. The geometric mean AUC of 30 mg ivermectin was 2.6 times higher when administered with food. Geometric mean AUC ratios (day 7/day 1) were 1.24 and 1.40 for the 30 and 60 mg doses, respectively, indicating that the accumulation of ivermectin given every fourth day is minimal. This study demonstrated that ivermectin is generally well tolerated at these higher doses and more frequent regimens.