Evaluation of the effect of modafinil on the pharmacokinetics of encorafenib and binimetinib in patients with BRAF V600-mutant advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: A clinical drug-drug interaction (DDI) study was designed to evaluate the effect of multiple doses of modafinil, a moderate CYP3A4 inducer at a 400 mg QD dose, on the multiple oral dose pharmacokinetics (PK) of encorafenib and its metabolite, LHY746 and binimetinib and its metabolite, AR00426032. METHODS: This study was conducted in patients with BRAF V600-mutant advanced solid tumors. Treatment of 400 mg QD modafinil was given on Day 15 through Day 21. Encorafenib 450 mg QD and binimetinib 45 mg BID were administered starting on Day 1. PK sampling was conducted from 0 to 8 h on Day 14 and Day 21. Exposure parameters were calculated for each patient by noncompartmental analysis and geometric least-squares mean ratio. Corresponding 90% confidence intervals were calculated to estimate the magnitude of effects. RESULTS: Among 11 PK evaluable patients, encorafenib Cmax and AUClast were decreased in presence of steady-state modafinil by 20.2% and 23.8%, respectively. LHY746 exposures were not substantially changed in the presence of steady-state modafinil. CONCLUSION: The results from this clinical study indicate modafinil 400 mg QD had a weak effect on encorafenib PK. Based on these results, encorafenib can be coadministered with a moderate CYP3A4 inducer without dosing adjustment. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03864042, registered 6 March 2019.

Clinical Evaluation of the Effect of Encorafenib on Bupropion, Rosuvastatin, and Coproporphyrin I and Considerations for Statin Coadministration.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Encorafenib is a kinase inhibitor indicated for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma or metastatic colorectal cancer, respectively, with selected BRAF V600 mutations. A clinical drug-drug interaction (DDI) study was designed to evaluate the effect of encorafenib on rosuvastatin, a sensitive substrate of OATP1B1/3 and breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP), and bupropion, a sensitive CYP2B6 substrate. Coproporphyrin I (CP-I), an endogenous substrate for OATP1B1, was measured in a separate study to deconvolute the mechanism of transporter DDI. METHODS: DDI study participants received a single oral dose of rosuvastatin (10 mg) and bupropion (75 mg) on days - 7, 1, and 14 and continuous doses of encorafenib (450 mg QD) and binimetinib (45 mg BID) starting on day 1. The CP-I data were collected from participants in a phase 3 study who received encorafenib (300 mg QD) and cetuximab (400 mg/m2 initial dose, then 250 mg/m2 QW). Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis was performed using noncompartmental and compartmental methods. RESULTS: Bupropion exposure was not increased, whereas rosuvastatin Cmax and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) increased approximately 2.7 and 1.6-fold, respectively, following repeated doses of encorafenib and binimetinib. Increase in CP-I was minimal, suggesting that the primary effect of encorafenib on rosuvastatin is through BCRP. Categorization of statins on the basis of their metabolic and transporter profile suggests pravastatin would have the least potential for interaction when coadministered with encorafenib. CONCLUSION: The results from these clinical studies suggest that encorafenib does not cause clinically relevant CYP2B6 induction or inhibition but is an inhibitor of BCRP and may also inhibit OATP1B1/3 to a lesser extent. Based on these results, it may be necessary to consider switching statins or reducing statin dosage accordingly for coadministration with encorafenib. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03864042, registered 6 March 2019.

A Phase I Study to Evaluate the Pharmacokinetics and Safety of Lorlatinib in Adults with Mild, Moderate, and Severe Renal Impairment.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Lorlatinib is approved (100 mg once daily [QD]) for the treatment of patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase- (ALK) positive metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. This study evaluated the impact of varying degrees of renal impairment on the safety and pharmacokinetics of lorlatinib. METHODS: Participants were assigned to mild, moderate, and severe renal impairment groups and to a matching normal renal function group based on absolute estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR, based on the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation and adjusted for body surface area [BSA]) and were evaluated for pharmacokinetics and safety. RESULTS: A total of 29 participants (5 with severe renal impairment; 8 each with moderate and mild impairment and normal renal function) were enrolled and received a single dose of lorlatinib 100 mg. One of the participants with severe renal impairment had end-stage renal disease with a baseline absolute eGFR of 10.3 mL/min. No serious adverse events (AEs) were reported. Eighteen AEs, all mild or moderate in severity, were reported by 12 participants (5, 2, 4, and 1 in the normal, mild, moderate, and severe groups, respectively). Area under the plasma concentration-time profile from time zero extrapolated to infinity (AUCinf) for lorlatinib was increased by 4%, 19%, and 41% in the mild, moderate, and severe renal impairment groups, respectively, compared with the normal renal function cohort. CONCLUSION: Lorlatinib 100 mg was well tolerated. As participants with mild and moderate renal impairment did not experience clinically meaningful increases in lorlatinib exposure, no lorlatinib dose adjustment is recommended in these populations. Patients with severe renal impairment are recommended to reduce the starting dose of lorlatinib from 100 mg QD to 75 mg QD. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03542305 (available May 31, 2018 on clinicaltrials.gov).

The Effect of Modafinil on the Safety and Pharmacokinetics of Lorlatinib: A Phase I Study in Healthy Participants.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Lorlatinib is a third-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for the second-line treatment of patients with advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small cell lung cancer. Lorlatinib is metabolized by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A and contraindicated with strong CYP3A inducers because of significant transaminase elevation. This phase I, open-label, two-period study evaluated the impact of a moderate CYP3A inducer, modafinil, on the safety and pharmacokinetics of lorlatinib. METHODS: Healthy participants received single-dose oral lorlatinib (50 mg [n = 2], 75 mg [n = 2], or 100 mg [n = 2 + 10 in an expanded cohort]) in Period 1 followed by modafinil 400 mg/day (days 1-19) and single-dose lorlatinib (day 15, same dose as previous) both orally in Period 2. Blood samples were collected for 120 h after each dose of lorlatinib. RESULTS: Of 16 participants, ten completed the study; six participants, all in the expanded 100-mg cohort, discontinued because of adverse events during the modafinil lead-in dosing period. Single doses of lorlatinib 50-100 mg were well tolerated when administered alone and in the presence of steady-state modafinil. Of the ten participants who completed the study, all had transaminase values within normal limits during the combination of lorlatinib with modafinil. The ratios of the adjusted geometric means (90% confidence interval) for lorlatinib area under the plasma concentration-time profile extrapolated to infinity and maximum plasma concentration were 76.69% (70.15-83.83%) and 77.78% (65.92-91.77), respectively, when lorlatinib 100 mg was co-administered with steady-state modafinil compared with lorlatinib administration alone. CONCLUSION: Lorlatinib 100 mg may be safely co-administered with moderate CYP3A inducers. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03961997; registered 23 May, 2019.

Numerical Response Surfaces of Volume of Ablation and Retropulsion Amplitude by Settings of Ho:YAG Laser Lithotripter.

Objectives: Although laser lithotripsy is now the preferred treatment option for urolithiasis due to shorter operation time and a better stone-free rate, the optimal laser settings for URS (ureteroscopic lithotripsy) for less operation time remain unclear. The aim of this study was to look for quantitative responses of calculus ablation and retropulsion by performing operator-independent experiments to determine the best fit versus the pulse energy, pulse width, and the number of pulses. Methods: A lab-built Ho:YAG laser was used as the laser pulse source, with a pulse energy from 0.2 J up to 3.0 J and a pulse width of 150 µs up to 1000 µs. The retropulsion was monitored using a high-speed camera, and the laser-induced craters were evaluated with a 3-D digital microscope. The best fit to the experimental data is done by a design of experiment software. Results: The numerical formulas for the response surfaces of ablation speed and retropulsion amplitude are generated. Conclusions: The longer the pulse, the less the ablation or retropulsion, while the longer pulse makes the ablation decrease faster than the retropulsion. The best quadratic fit of the response surface for the volume of ablation varied nonlinearly with pulse duration and pulse number.

A Pragmatic Randomized Trial Comparing Telephone-Based Enhanced Pharmacy Care and Usual Care to Support Smoking Cessation.

BACKGROUND: Smoking is the leading preventable cause of death, and tobacco control professionals continue to make progress in cessation efforts. Pharmacists can assist smokers seeking to quit by offering counseling on smoking cessation pharmacotherapies. Pragmatic randomized trials are useful for investigating practical questions about an intervention's risks, benefits, and costs in routine clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate an enhanced pharmacy care (EPC) program involving personalized pharmacist-provided telephone counseling for supporting prescription smoking cessation medications compared with usual care (UC). METHODS: Cigarette smokers filling a newly prescribed smoking cessation pharmacotherapy and with pharmacy benefits managed by Express Scripts were recruited. Qualified subjects were randomized 1:1 to EPC and UC. Subjects in EPC received 3 telephone-counseling sessions from specialist pharmacists during the early course of the study, while subjects in UC did not receive any counseling sessions. Study outcomes were collected through telephone contact and using the Express Scripts prescription database. The primary outcome assessed the 1-week point prevalence (PP) of smoking abstinence at the end of the trial (week 12). Secondary outcomes included 4-week PP at week 12 and adherence, evaluated by proportion of days covered (PDC), to prescribed smoking cessation pharmacotherapies. RESULTS: There were 1,017 randomized subjects. Among them, 1,002 subjects were included in the analysis, and 513 were randomized into EPC and 489 into UC. Baseline demographics, smoking history, and prescribed smoking cessation pharmacotherapies were comparable. Varenicline and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) were most frequently prescribed for smoking cessation. In EPC, 46.0% received all 3 counseling sessions; 29.4% received 2 sessions; and 14.6% received 1 session. Overall, 353 subjects in EPC and 383 subjects in UC completed the week 12 assessment. In the analysis for 1-week PP of smoking abstinence at week 12, the percentage of abstainers in EPC was numerically higher than in UC (42.3% vs. 38.2%) with OR = 1.24, 95% CI = 0.96-1.61. It was not statistically significant. Adherence to prescription smoking cessation medication was significantly higher in EPC versus UC (49.7% vs. 45.6%; P = 0.033). CONCLUSIONS: This study evaluated whether a telephone-based pharmacy care program, provided by pharmacists and designed to support attempted quitters, improved quitting and increased adherence over usual care. The findings suggest that an enhanced program may benefit smokers by increasing prescription smoking cessation medication adherence. Future research should explore this program's effect on smokers who are compliant, based on insights on quitting provided by the post hoc analyses and limitations of the current study design. DISCLOSURES: This study was sponsored by Pfizer. Gong, Baker, Zou, Bruno, Jumadilova, and Lawrence are employees and stockholders of Pfizer. Wilson and Ewel are employees of United BioSource Corporation, which received funding from Pfizer for conducting this study and for the development of this manuscript. Study concept and design were contributed by Gong, Bruno, and Ewel, with assistance from Jumadilova, Lawrence, and Zou. Gong, Jumadilova, Lawrence, and Ewel collected the data. Data interpretation was performed by Baker, Zou, and Wilson, assisted by Gong, Lawrence, and Ewel. The manuscript was written by Baker, Ewel, and Gong, with assistance from the other authors, and revised by Baker, Wilson, Zou, and Gong, with assistance from Bruno and Jumadilova.

Effect of fesoterodine in vulnerable elderly subjects with urgency incontinence: a double-blind, placebo controlled trial.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of flexible dose fesoterodine in medically complex vulnerable elderly subjects with urgency urinary incontinence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this 12-week, randomized, double-blind, flexible dose, placebo controlled trial, subjects were community dwelling men and women 65 years old or older. Subjects had scores of 3 or more on the VES-13 (Vulnerable Elders Survey) and 20 or more on the MMSE (Mini-Mental State Examination), and 2 to 15 urgency urinary incontinence episodes and 8 or more micturitions per 24 hours on 3-day baseline diaries. Subjects randomized to fesoterodine received 4 mg once daily for 4 weeks and could then increase to 8 mg based on discussion with the investigator. Subjects receiving 8 mg could decrease the dose to 4 mg at any time (sham escalation and de-escalation for placebo). The primary outcome measure was change in daily urgency urinary incontinence episodes. Secondary outcomes included changes in other diary variables and patient reported quality of life measures. Safety evaluations included self-reported symptoms and post-void residual volume. RESULTS: A total of 562 patients were randomized (mean age 75 years, 50.4% age 75 years or greater). Subjects had high rates of comorbidities, polypharmacy and functional impairment. At week 12 the fesoterodine group had significantly greater improvements in urgency urinary incontinence episodes per 24 hours (-2.84 vs -2.20, p = 0.002) and most other diary variables and quality of life, as well as a higher diary dry rate (50.8% vs 36.0%, p = 0.002). Adverse effects were generally similar to those of younger populations including risk of urinary retention. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge this is the first antimuscarinic study in a community based, significantly older, medically complex elderly population with urgency urinary incontinence. Flexible dose fesoterodine significantly improved urgency urinary incontinence episodes and other outcomes vs placebo, and was generally well tolerated.

Add-on fesoterodine for residual storage symptoms suggestive of overactive bladder in men receiving α-blocker treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms.

UNLABELLED: Study Type - Therapy (RCT) Level of Evidence 1b What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Male lower urinary tract symptoms are often attributed to bladder outlet obstruction secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia and treated with drugs targeting the prostate. However, many men with storage lower urinary tract symptoms may not respond adequately to these agents. Antimuscarinics, with or without an α-blocker, may be effective for the treatment of the storage symptoms of overactive bladder in some men. Flexible-dose fesoterodine as an add-on treatment significantly improved urinary frequency and symptom bother, but not urgency episodes (primary endpoint), versus add-on placebo and was well tolerated in men with persistent overactive bladder symptoms despite receiving α-blocker. OBJECTIVE: • To evaluate flexible-dose fesoterodine vs placebo in men with persistent overactive bladder (OAB) symptoms despite receiving α-blocker treatment SUBJECTS AND METHODS: • This was a double-blind, 12-week, flexible-dose trial. • Men with persistent storage symptoms (≥ 8 micturitions and ≥ 3 urgency episodes per 24 h) after receiving an α-blocker for ≥ 6 weeks were randomized to add-on fesoterodine 4 mg or placebo, with optional dose escalation to 8 mg at week 4 and reduction back to 4 mg at week 8 (or matching placebo adjustments). • Subjects completed 3-day diaries, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q), Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC), and Urgency Perception Scale (UPS) at baseline and weeks 4 and 12. RESULTS: • A total of 943 men were randomized and received at least one dose of study treatment (fesoterodine, n= 471; placebo, n= 472). • Among these, 251 (53%) in the fesoterodine group and 300 (64%) in the placebo group requested dose escalation at week 4 and 35 (7%) and 15 (3%) requested dose reduction at week 8. Changes from baseline to week 12 in urgency episodes (primary endpoint) in the fesoterodine (-3.2) and placebo (-2.9) groups were not significantly different (P= 0.196), but improvements in micturitions (P= 0.009) and OAB-q symptom bother score (P= 0.007) were significantly greater with fesoterodine. • At week 4, significantly greater improvements in micturitions (P= 0.006), severe urgency episodes (P= 0.006), IPSS storage score (P= 0.022), OAB-q symptom bother score (P= 0.004), and OAB-q health-related quality of life (P= 0.041), but not urgency episodes (P= 0.062), were observed with add-on fesoterodine. • Dry mouth (fesoterodine, 21%; placebo, 6%) and constipation (fesoterodine, 6%; placebo, 2%) were the most common adverse events. Dysuria and urinary retention were reported by 3% and 2% of subjects, respectively, in the fesoterodine add-on group vs 1% and <1% of subjects, respectively in the placebo add-on group. One subject in each group had acute urinary retention requiring catheterization. CONCLUSIONS: • Flexible-dose fesoterodine was well tolerated as an add-on treatment in men with persistent storage symptoms. • Changes in urgency episodes at week 12 (primary endpoint) and many secondary endpoints were not significantly different between fesoterodine and placebo add-on treatment; however, improvements in frequency and symptom bother were significantly greater with fesoterodine. • These data suggest that there remains a limited understanding of the optimal evaluation and treatment of men with LUTS.

Effects of fesoterodine on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of warfarin in healthy volunteers.

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT: Drug-drug interactions with warfarin are common with potentially harmful consequences. Preclinical in vitro studies suggest that fesoterodine or 5-hydroxymethyl tolterodine are not likely to affect warfarin metabolism, but a lack of interaction has not been demonstrated in a clinical study. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS: This study shows that the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of warfarin 25 mg in healthy adults are unaffected by fesoterodine 8 mg, and that co-administration of warfarin 25 mg and fesoterodine 8 mg is safe and well tolerated. AIMS: To confirm the lack of an interaction of fesoterodine 8 mg with warfarin pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in healthy adults. METHODS: In this open-label, two-treatment, crossover study, subjects (n= 14) aged 20-41 years with normal prothrombin time (PT) and International Normalized Ratio (INR) were randomized to receive a single dose of warfarin 25 mg alone in one period and fesoterodine 8 mg once daily on days 1-9 with a single dose of warfarin 25 mg co-administered on day 3 in the other period. There was a 10-day washout between treatments. Pharmacokinetic endpoints were area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC(0,∞)), maximum plasma concentration (C(max)), AUC from time 0 to the time of the last quantifiable concentration (AUC(0,last)), time to C(max) (t(max) ), and half-life (t(1/2)) for S- and R-warfarin. Pharmacodynamic endpoints were area under the INR-time curve (AUC(INR) ), maximum INR (INR(max)), area under the PT-time curve (AUC(PT)) and maximum PT (PT(max)). RESULTS: Across all pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic comparisons, the point estimates of treatment ratio (warfarin co-administered with fesoterodine vs. warfarin alone) were 92-100%. The 90% confidence intervals for the ratios of the adjusted geometric means were contained within (80%, 125%). There were no clinically relevant changes in laboratory tests, vital signs or ECG recordings. CONCLUSIONS: The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of warfarin 25 mg in healthy adults are unaffected by fesoterodine 8 mg. Concomitant administration of fesoterodine and warfarin was well tolerated.

Effect of fesoterodine 4 mg on bladder diary and patient-reported outcomes during the first week of treatment in subjects with overactive bladder.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the onset of efficacy of fesoterodine 4 mg versus placebo in subjects with overactive bladder (OAB) symptoms. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Subjects who reported OAB symptoms for ≥ 3 months and recorded ≥ 8 micturitions and ≥ 1 urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) episode per 24 hours in 3-day baseline diaries were randomized to fesoterodine 4 mg, tolterodine extended release (ER) 4 mg, or placebo. This is an analysis of first week data from a 12-week, double-blind trial. ClinicalTrials.gov unique ID: NCT00444925. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Baseline to week 1 changes in 3-day bladder diary variables, Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC), and Urgency Perception Scale (UPS) scores reported by subjects receiving fesoterodine 4 mg or placebo. RESULTS: By week 1, fesoterodine 4 mg (n = 679) was associated with significantly greater improvements compared with placebo (n = 334) in micturitions, urgency, severe urgency and UUI episodes, frequency-urgency sum, and MVV per 24 hours and 3-day diary-dry rate (all p < 0.05), but not nocturnal micturitions per 24 hours (p = 0.273). These differences were significant as early as day 5 of treatment (i.e., day 1 of the 3-day diary) for all diary endpoints except nocturnal micturitions and MVV. Changes in PPBC scores were significantly more favorable with fesoterodine 4 mg versus placebo (p = 0.0143); changes in UPS scores were not significantly different (p = 0.077). CONCLUSION: The results provide evidence that patients receiving fesoterodine 4 mg for their OAB symptoms may expect to experience a response as early as 1 week after initiating treatment. One limitation is that, although 65% of subjects had received treatment with antimuscarinics before the study, whether subjects were dissatisfied with previous treatment and reasons for dissatisfaction were not collected. This might affect the magnitude of outcome improvements. Also, it is not known whether the UPS is sensitive enough to detect treatment differences as early as week 1.

Early onset of fesoterodine efficacy in subjects with overactive bladder.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the onset of efficacy of fesoterodine 4 mg once daily on overactive bladder (OAB) symptoms after 1 week of treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prespecified analysis of data collected during the first week of a 12-week, open-label, single-arm, flexible-dose study of fesoterodine. Eligible subjects were adult men and women (aged ≥ 18 years) who reported urinary frequency (eight or more micturitions per 24 h) and urgency (three or more episodes per 24 h) in 5-day bladder diaries at baseline, and dissatisfaction with previous tolterodine or tolterodine extended-release treatment received within 2 years of screening. All subjects received fesoterodine 4 mg once daily during the first 4 weeks of treatment (with an optional dose increase to fesoterodine 8 mg after week 4). Early onset of efficacy of fesoterodine 4 mg was assessed based on changes from baseline to week 1 in variables recorded in 5-day bladder diaries, including total micturitions, urgency episodes, urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) episodes and nocturnal micturitions. Urgency and severe urgency episodes were defined as those rated ≥ 3 and ≥ 4, respectively, on the five-point Urinary Sensation Scale (USS) (1 = no urgency, 5 = UUI); frequency-urgency sum (a combined measure of micturition frequency and urgency) was defined as the sum of all USS ratings. RESULTS: All bladder diary variables, including total and nocturnal micturitions, UUI episodes, urgency episodes, severe urgency episodes and frequency-urgency sum per 24 h, were significantly improved (all P < 0.0001) after 1 week of treatment with fesoterodine 4 mg compared to baseline. The diary-dry rate at week 1 (i.e. subjects with at least one UUI episode at baseline who subsequently reported no UUI episodes on week 1 diary) was 38%. CONCLUSION: In this open-label study of subjects with OAB who had been previously treated and dissatisfied with tolterodine, fesoterodine 4 mg showed a rapid onset of efficacy at 1 week.

Patient-optimized doses of fesoterodine improve bladder symptoms in an open-label, flexible-dose study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess changes in overactive bladder (OAB) symptoms and patient-reported outcomes in a post hoc analysis in which subjects from a 12-week, open-label, flexible-dose fesoterodine study were stratified according to whether they opted for dose escalation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Subjects with OAB (eight or more micturitions and three or more urgency episodes per 24 h) who reported dissatisfaction with tolterodine within 2 years of screening received fesoterodine 4 mg once daily for 4 weeks, with an optional dose increase to 8 mg after week 4 based on discussion of efficacy and tolerability between the subject and investigator. Subjects completed 5-day diaries, the Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC) and Urgency Perception Scale (UPS) at baseline and weeks 4 and 12, and the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q) at baseline and week 12. Subjects rated treatment satisfaction at week 12. RESULTS: Dose escalation to 8 mg at week 4 was chosen by 255 (50%) of 513 subjects. At baseline, subjects who opted for dose escalation at week 4 (escalators) had significantly higher means for all diary variables except urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) episodes, significantly greater OAB-q Symptom Bother scores and significantly lower OAB-q health-related quality of life (HRQL) scores (all P < 0.05) compared to subjects who did not opt for dose escalation (non-escalators). There was no significant difference in the percentage of escalators (51%) and non-escalators (48%) who reported at least one UUI episode on baseline diary. At week 4 (before the decision to escalate was made), all outcomes were significantly improved vs baseline among both groups (all P < 0.0001), although non-escalators had significantly greater improvements in all diary variables and in PPBC and UPS scores than escalators (all P < 0.05), and the 5-day diary-dry rate (i.e. the percentage of subjects with at least one UUI episode on baseline diary and no UUI episodes on week 4 diary) was significantly higher (P = 0.0016) among non-escalators (62%) than among escalators (42%). At week 12, all outcomes were again significantly improved vs baseline among both groups (all P < 0.0001). There were no significant differences between non-escalators and escalators in week 12 improvements for most diary variables, UPS scores, OAB-q Symptom Bother scores, the diary-dry rate (68% vs 60%) or the percentage of subjects who reported treatment satisfaction (82% vs 78%). However, escalators still had significantly greater improvements from baseline in urgency episodes, PPBC scores and OAB-q total HRQL and Coping domains (P < 0.05). Adverse event rates were similar between non-escalators and escalators. Dry mouth was the most frequently reported adverse event; most cases were mild. CONCLUSION: Flexible-dose fesoterodine significantly improved OAB symptoms and patient-reported outcomes in subjects who chose to remain on the initial 4-mg dose, as well as in the 50% of subjects who escalated to the 8-mg dose after 4 weeks. Non-escalators had significantly fewer OAB symptoms at baseline and significantly greater improvements than escalators before dose escalation. Escalators showed increased symptom relief after dose escalation; improvements in most outcomes were similar among non-escalators and escalators by week 12. Flexible-dose fesoterodine was well tolerated, with similar adverse-event profiles observed in the escalator and non-escalator groups. These results may help clinicians to identify patients more likely to require fesoterodine 8 mg to achieve maximum relief of OAB symptoms and thus facilitate dose escalation in these patients.

Superior efficacy of fesoterodine over tolterodine extended release with rapid onset: a prospective, head-to-head, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: • To show the superior efficacy of fesoterodine over tolterodine extended release (ER) in a placebo-controlled overactive bladder (OAB) trial with predefined treatment comparisons for both diary measures and patient-reported outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: • In this 12-week, double-blind, double-dummy trial, subjects reporting >1 urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) episode and ≥8 micturitions per 24 h at baseline were randomized to fesoterodine (4 mg for 1 week, 8 mg for 11 weeks), tolterodine ER 4 mg, or placebo. • Subjects completed 3-day bladder diaries, the Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC) and the Urgency Perception Scale (UPS) at baseline and weeks 1, 4 and 12 and the OAB Questionnaire at baseline and week 12. RESULTS: • A total of 2417 subjects were randomized. At week 12, fesoterodine 8 mg showed superiority over tolterodine ER 4 mg and placebo on UUI episodes (primary endpoint), micturitions, urgency and most other diary endpoints, and on the PPBC, UPS and all OAB Questionnaire scales and domains (all P < 0.05). • Superiority of fesoterodine 8 mg over tolterodine ER 4 mg was seen as early as week 4 (3 weeks after escalation to fesoterodine 8 mg). At week 1, fesoterodine 4 mg was superior to placebo on most diary variables, the PPBC and the UPS (all P < 0.05). Dry mouth and constipation rates were 28% and 4% with fesoterodine, 13% and 3% with tolterodine ER, and 5% and 2% with placebo. • Discontinuation rates as a result of adverse events were 5%, 3% and 2% for fesoterodine, tolterodine ER and placebo, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: • In this randomized study, which is the largest to compare antimuscarinic efficacy performed to date, fesoterodine 8 mg was superior to tolterodine ER 4 mg for UUI episodes, micturitions and urgency episodes, as well as for self-reported patient assessments of bladder-related problems, urgency, symptom bother and health-related quality of life. • The superiority of fesoterodine 8 mg over tolterodine ER 4 mg was observed as early as 3 weeks after escalation from fesoterodine 4 mg for most outcomes. These data may have important implications for the clinical management of OAB patients previously treated with tolterodine ER.

Comparison of fesoterodine and tolterodine extended release for the treatment of overactive bladder: a head-to-head placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of fesoterodine 8 mg with tolterodine extended-release (ER) 4 mg and placebo in a randomized clinical trial of patients with an overactive bladder (OAB). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this 12-week double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial, eligible patients reported OAB symptoms for > or = 3 months and recorded > or = 8 voids and > or = 1 urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) episode per 24 h in 3-day bladder diaries at baseline. Patients were randomized in a 2:2:1 ratio to fesoterodine (4 mg for 1 week then 8 mg for 11 weeks); tolterodine ER 4 mg; or placebo (with sham dose escalation for tolterodine ER and placebo). Endpoints were changes from baseline to week 12 in UUI episodes (primary endpoint), total and nocturnal voids, urgency episodes, severe urgency episodes, and frequency-urgency sum per 24 h; mean voided volume per void (MVV); and the OAB questionnaire (OAB-q), Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC), and Urgency Perception Scale (UPS). Safety and tolerability were assessed and summarized over the 12-week study period. RESULTS: Fesoterodine (636 patients) significantly improved UUI episodes at week 12 (primary endpoint) compared with tolterodine ER (641 patients; P = 0.017) and placebo (313 patients; P < 0.001). Fesoterodine also produced significantly greater improvements than tolterodine ER in MVV (P = 0.005). Fesoterodine significantly improved all diary endpoints compared with placebo (P < 0.001), except for nocturnal voids (P = 0.327). Tolterodine ER significantly improved all diary endpoints vs placebo (P < 0.001), except for nocturnal voids (P = 0.506) and MVV (P = 0.103). Diary dry rates (the proportion of patients reporting no UUI episodes at endpoint among those with one or more UUI episodes at baseline) were significantly higher with fesoterodine (64%) than with tolterodine ER (57%; P = 0.015) and placebo (45%; P < 0.001). Improvements in PPBC, UPS and OAB-q scale and domain scores at week 12 were all significantly better with fesoterodine than placebo (all P < 0.001) and tolterodine ER (all P < 0.05) except for the OAB-q Sleep domain vs tolterodine ER (P = 0.081). Dry mouth and constipation rates were 28% and 5% in the fesoterodine group, 16% and 4% in the tolterodine ER group, and 6% and 3% with placebo, respectively. Discontinuations due to treatment-emergent adverse events were 6%, 4% and 2% in the fesoterodine, tolterodine ER, and placebo groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: In patients with OAB, fesoterodine 8 mg showed superior efficacy over tolterodine ER 4 mg and placebo in reducing UUI episodes (primary endpoint) and in improving most patient-reported outcome measures. Both active treatments were well tolerated.

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of flexible-dose fesoterodine in subjects with overactive bladder.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of flexible-dose fesoterodine vs placebo in subjects with overactive bladder (OAB). METHODS: In a 12-week double-blind trial, subjects were randomized to fesoterodine 4 mg or placebo once daily, taken within 4 hours of bedtime. At week 2, subjects could increase the fesoterodine dose to 8 mg (sham escalation for placebo). Subjects completed 3-day bladder diaries, Patient Perception of Bladder Condition, and Urgency Perception Scale at baseline and weeks 2, 6, and 12 as well as OAB Questionnaire at baseline and week 12. RESULTS: Of 883 subjects, 63% and 73% of the fesoterodine (n = 438) and placebo (n = 445) groups, respectively, opted for dose escalation. Week 12 improvements from baseline in total micturitions, urgency episodes, urgency urinary incontinence episodes, frequency-urgency sum, and all OAB Questionnaire scales and domains, but not nocturnal micturitions or nocturnal urgency episodes, were significantly greater with fesoterodine than placebo (all P <.05). Treatment differences in micturitions and frequency-urgency sum were significant by week 2 and in urgency urinary incontinence and urgency episodes by week 6. Significantly greater percentages of subjects taking fesoterodine had improved Patient Perception of Bladder Condition and Urgency Perception Scale scores at weeks 2, 6, and 12 (P <.05). Dry mouth (fesoterodine, 26%; placebo, 8%) and constipation (fesoterodine, 11%; placebo, 6%) were the most common adverse events. In both groups, 87% of the subjects completed the trial; 8% and 5% of the fesoterodine and placebo groups, respectively, discontinued because of an adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Flexible-dose fesoterodine was efficacious and generally well tolerated for treatment of OAB symptoms.

A double-blind study evaluating the long-term safety of varenicline for smoking cessation.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the safety of long-term varenicline administration for smoking cessation. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial, eligible adult smokers (18-75 years) who smoked an average of > or =10 cigarettes/day were randomized to either varenicline 1 mg twice daily (BID) or placebo for 52 weeks. Subjects made weekly clinic visits until week 8, and then every 4 weeks until week 52, with a follow-up visit at week 53. The target quit date was the morning of the week 1 clinic visit. Brief counseling was provided at each visit, and vital signs, adverse events (AEs), and smoking status were documented. Other laboratory measures were collected at specified visits. RESULTS: A total of 251 subjects were randomized to varenicline and 126 to placebo. Approximately half of the subjects in each arm completed the study (53.8% varenicline; 46.8% placebo). Treatment-emergent AEs were observed in 96.4% of varenicline- and 82.5% of placebo-treated subjects during the study. Common varenicline-associated AEs were nausea (40.2%), abnormal dreams (22.7%), and insomnia (19.1%). Most AEs were considered mild or moderate in intensity. AEs leading to discontinuation of varenicline treatment included nausea (7.6%), insomnia (3.2%), and abnormal dreams (2.4%). A single varenicline-related serious AE, bilateral subcapsular cataracts, was observed. At week 52, 7-day point prevalence abstinence rates were 36.7% (varenicline) and 7.9% (placebo). CONCLUSIONS: Varenicline 1 mg BID can be safely administered for up to 1 year. Varenicline was also a more effective smoking cessation aid than placebo throughout the study, supporting both its short- (12-week) and long-term (52-week) efficacy.

Varenicline, an alpha4beta2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor partial agonist, vs sustained-release bupropion and placebo for smoking cessation: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: The alpha4beta2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs) are linked to the reinforcing effects of nicotine and maintaining smoking behavior. Varenicline, a novel alpha4beta2 nAChR partial agonist, may be beneficial for smoking cessation. OBJECTIVE: To assess efficacy and safety of varenicline for smoking cessation compared with sustained-release bupropion (bupropion SR) and placebo. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo- and active-treatment-controlled, phase 3 clinical trial conducted at 19 US centers from June 19, 2003, to April 22, 2005. Participants were 1025 generally healthy smokers (> or =10 cigarettes/d) with fewer than 3 months of smoking abstinence in the past year, 18 to 75 years old, recruited via advertising. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive brief counseling and varenicline titrated to 1 mg twice per day (n = 352), bupropion SR titrated to 150 mg twice per day (n = 329), or placebo (n = 344) orally for 12 weeks, with 40 weeks of nondrug follow-up. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was the exhaled carbon monoxide-confirmed 4-week rate of continuous abstinence from smoking for weeks 9 through 12. A secondary outcome was the continuous abstinence rate for weeks 9 through 24 and weeks 9 through 52. RESULTS: For weeks 9 through 12, the 4-week continuous abstinence rates were 44.0% for varenicline vs 17.7% for placebo (odds ratio [OR], 3.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.70-5.50; P<.001) and vs 29.5% for bupropion SR (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.40-2.68; P<.001). Bupropion SR was also significantly more efficacious than placebo (OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.38-2.89; P<.001). For weeks 9 through 52, the continuous abstinence rates were 21.9% for varenicline vs 8.4% for placebo (OR, 3.09; 95% CI, 1.95-4.91; P<.001) and vs 16.1% for bupropion SR (OR, 1.46; 95% CI, 0.99-2.17; P = .057). Varenicline reduced craving and withdrawal and, for those who smoked while receiving study drug, smoking satisfaction. No sex differences in efficacy for varenicline were observed. Varenicline was safe and generally well tolerated, with study drug discontinuation rates similar to those for placebo. The most common adverse events for participants receiving active-drug treatment were nausea (98 participants receiving varenicline [28.1%]) and insomnia (72 receiving bupropion SR [21.9%]). CONCLUSION: Varenicline was significantly more efficacious than placebo for smoking cessation at all time points and significantly more efficacious than bupropion SR at the end of 12 weeks of drug treatment and at 24 weeks. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00141206.

Efficacy of varenicline, an alpha4beta2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor partial agonist, vs placebo or sustained-release bupropion for smoking cessation: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Varenicline, a partial agonist at the alpha4beta2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor, has the potential to aid smoking cessation by relieving nicotine withdrawal symptoms and reducing the rewarding properties of nicotine. OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy and safety of varenicline for smoking cessation compared with placebo or sustained-release bupropion (bupropion SR). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted between June 2003 and March 2005 at 14 research centers with a 12-week treatment period and follow-up of smoking status to week 52. Of 1413 adult smokers who volunteered for the study, 1027 were enrolled; 65% of randomized participants completed the study. INTERVENTION: Varenicline titrated to 1 mg twice daily (n = 344) or bupropion SR titrated to 150 mg twice daily (n = 342) or placebo (n = 341) for 12 weeks, plus weekly brief smoking cessation counseling. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Continuous abstinence from smoking during the last 4 weeks of treatment (weeks 9-12; primary end point) and through the follow-up period (weeks 9-24 and 9-52). RESULTS: During the last 4 weeks of treatment (weeks 9-12), 43.9% of participants in the varenicline group were continuously abstinent from smoking compared with 17.6% in the placebo group (odds ratio [OR], 3.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.69-5.50; P<.001) and 29.8% in the bupropion SR group (OR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.38-2.62; P<.001). For weeks 9 through 24, 29.7% of participants in the varenicline group were continuously abstinent compared with 13.2% in the placebo group (OR, 2.83; 95% CI, 1.91-4.19; P<.001) and 20.2% in the bupropion group (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.19-2.42; P = .003). For weeks 9 through 52, 23% of participants in the varenicline group were continuously abstinent compared with 10.3% in the placebo group (OR, 2.66; 95% CI, 1.72-4.11; P<.001) and 14.6% in the bupropion SR group (OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.19-2.63; P = .004). Treatment was discontinued due to adverse events by 10.5% of participants in the varenicline group, 12.6% in the bupropion SR group, and 7.3% in the placebo group. The most common adverse event with varenicline was nausea, which occurred in 101 participants (29.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Varenicline is an efficacious, safe, and well-tolerated smoking cessation pharmacotherapy. Varenicline's short-term and long-term efficacy exceeded that of both placebo and bupropion SR. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00143364.

CASMIL: a comprehensive software/toolkit for image-guided neurosurgeries.

BACKGROUND: CASMIL aims to develop a cost-effective and efficient approach to monitor and predict deformation during surgery, allowing accurate, and real-time intra-operative information to be provided reliably to the surgeon. METHOD: CASMIL is a comprehensive Image-guided Neurosurgery System with extensive novel features. It is an integration of various modules including rigid and non-rigid body co-registration (image-image, image-atlas, and image-patient), automated 3D segmentation, brain shift predictor, knowledge based query tools, intelligent planning, and augmented reality. One of the vital and unique modules is the Intelligent Planning module, which displays the best surgical corridor on the computer screen based on tumor location, captured surgeon knowledge, and predicted brain shift using patient specific Finite Element Model. Also, it has multi-level parallel computing to provide near real-time interaction with iMRI (Intra-operative MRI). In addition, it has been securely web-enabled and optimized for remote web and PDA access. RESULTS: A version of this system is being used and tested using real patient data and is expected to be in use in the operating room at the Detroit Medical Center in the first half of 2006. CONCLUSION: CASMIL is currently under development and is targeted for minimally invasive surgeries. With minimal changes to the design, it can be easily extended and made available for other surgical procedures.