Effect of Sitagliptin on Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Data are lacking on the long-term effect on cardiovascular events of adding sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor, to usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind study, we assigned 14,671 patients to add either sitagliptin or placebo to their existing therapy. Open-label use of antihyperglycemic therapy was encouraged as required, aimed at reaching individually appropriate glycemic targets in all patients. To determine whether sitagliptin was noninferior to placebo, we used a relative risk of 1.3 as the marginal upper boundary. The primary cardiovascular outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for unstable angina. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 3.0 years, there was a small difference in glycated hemoglobin levels (least-squares mean difference for sitagliptin vs. placebo, -0.29 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.32 to -0.27). Overall, the primary outcome occurred in 839 patients in the sitagliptin group (11.4%; 4.06 per 100 person-years) and 851 patients in the placebo group (11.6%; 4.17 per 100 person-years). Sitagliptin was noninferior to placebo for the primary composite cardiovascular outcome (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.09; P<0.001). Rates of hospitalization for heart failure did not differ between the two groups (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.20; P=0.98). There were no significant between-group differences in rates of acute pancreatitis (P=0.07) or pancreatic cancer (P=0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease, adding sitagliptin to usual care did not appear to increase the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, hospitalization for heart failure, or other adverse events. (Funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme; TECOS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00790205.).

Pregnancy outcomes from the pregnancy registry of a human papillomavirus type 6/11/16/18 vaccine.

OBJECTIVE: To better describe the safety profile of pregnancy exposures to the human papillomavirus (HPV) type 6/11/16/18 vaccine by acquiring and analyzing postmarketing data on pregnancy outcomes (ie, live births, abortions, fetal deaths, and congenital anomalies). METHODS: Enrollment criteria included an identifiable patient and health care provider from the United States, France, or Canada and exposure within 1 month before the date of onset of the last menstrual period or at any time during pregnancy. Outcomes of interest were pregnancy outcomes and birth defects. Prospectively reported cases (reported before the outcome of the pregnancy was known) were used for rate calculations. RESULTS: For the 517 prospective reports with known outcome, 451 (87.2%) were live births, including three sets of twins. Of 454 neonates, 439 (96.7%) were normal. The overall rate of spontaneous abortion was 6.9 per 100 outcomes (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.8-9.6). The prevalence of major birth defects was 2.2 per 100 liveborn neonates (95% CI 1.05-4.05). There were seven fetal deaths (1.5 per 100 outcomes, 95% CI 0.60-3.09). CONCLUSION: Rates of spontaneous abortions and major birth defects were not greater than the unexposed population rates. Although no adverse signals have been identified to date, the HPV6/11/16/18 vaccine is not recommended for use in pregnant women. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Comparison of rofecoxib and oxycodone plus acetaminophen in the treatment of acute pain: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in patients with moderate to severe postoperative pain in the third molar extraction model.

BACKGROUND: Opiates, acetaminophen, nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and cyclooxygenase-2-selective inhibitors such as rofecoxib are used in the treatment of acute pain because of their anti-inflammatory and/or analgesic properties. Rofecoxib has demonstrated an improved gastrointestinal safety profile compared with nonselective NSAIDs. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the analgesic efficacy and tolerability profile of rofecoxib 50 mg with those of the centrally acting, nonsalicylate, opiate/nonopiate analgesic combination oxycodone/acetominophen 5/325 in patients with pain after dental surgery. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active comparator-controlled study, patients experiencing moderate to severe postoperative pain after extraction of > or =2 third molars (including > or =1 mandibular impaction) received a single oral dose of rofecoxib 50 mg, oxycodone/acetaminophen 5/325 mg, or placebo. End points included total pain relief over 6 hours (TOPAR6, the primary end point) and 4 hours (TOPAR4), patient's global assessment of treatment at 6 hours (GLOBAL6) and 24 hours (GLOBAL24), summed pain intensity difference over 6 hours (SPID6), onset of analgesic effect (time to perceptible/meaningful pain relief, using a 2-stopwatch method), peak pain relief (PEAKPR), peak pain intensity difference (PEAKPID), and duration of analgesic effect (time to use of rescue analgesia). RESULTS: Two hundred twelve patients (63% female, 37% male; 76% white, 24% other; mean [SD] age, 20.9 [4.4] years; age range, 16-41 years) were enrolled in the study and received a single oral dose of rofecoxib 50 mg (n = 90), oxycodone/acetaminophen 5/325 mg (n = 91), or placebo (n = 31). The analgesic effect of rofecoxib was significantly greater than that of oxycodone/acetaminophen at P < 0.001 for TOPAR6, TOPAR4, GLOBAL6, GLOBAL24, and SPID6; at P < 0.010 for PEAKPR and PEAKPID; and at P < 0.001 for median time to use of rescue analgesia. Significantly fewer patients in the rofecoxib group (72.2%) took rescue analgesia within 24 hours postdose compared with the oxycodone/acetaminophen group (94.5%; P < 0.001) and the placebo group (96.8%; P < 0.02). Both active treatments were similar with respect to onset of analgesic effect. Both were generally well tolerated; the overall incidence of adverse experiences in the rofecoxib, oxycodone/acetaminophen, and placebo groups was 51.1%, 64.8%, and 48.4%, respectively. Rofecoxib was associated with a significantly lower incidence of nausea (18.9% vs 39.6%; P < 0.001) and vomiting (6.7% vs 23.1%; P < 0.001) compared with oxycodone/acetaminophen. CONCLUSIONS: In study patients with moderate to severe pain after dental surgery, rofecoxib 50 mg had a greater analgesic effect than oxycodone/acetaminophen 5/325 mg and was associated with less nausea and vomiting.

Efficacy of a low-dose regimen of cyclobenzaprine hydrochloride in acute skeletal muscle spasm: results of two placebo-controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Cyclobenzaprine hydrochloride is a muscle relaxant that is effective in improving muscle spasm, reducing local pain and tenderness, and increasing range of motion in acute, painful musculoskeletal conditions. Sedation is the most common adverse event associated with its use at the usual dosage of 10 mg TID. Studies in healthy adults suggest that a lower dose may produce less sedation. Because cyclobenzaprine's duration of action is 4 to 6 hours, reducing the dosing frequency to 10 mg BID would create a potentially painful untreated interval between doses. The alternative is administration of a lower dose (eg, 5 or 2.5 mg) TID. OBJECTIVE: These studies were designed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of cyclobenzaprine 2.5, 5, and 10 mg TID compared with placebo in patients with acute musculoskeletal spasm. METHODS: In 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trials conducted at primary care centers in the United States, adult patients with acute painful muscle spasm of the lumbar or cervical region were randomly assigned to receive treatment with 2.5, 5, or 10 mg cyclobenzaprine TID or placebo for 7 days (study 1: cyclobenzaprine 5 or 10 mg TID or placebo; study 2: cyclobenzaprine 2.5 or 5 mg TID or placebo). The primary efficacy measures were patient-rated clinical global impression of change, medication helpfulness, and relief from starting backache. Neither study included a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) as an active control. Although physicians frequently prescribe an analgesic or NSAID in addition to cyclobenzaprine, these studies were not designed to assess whether adding cyclobenzaprine provides a benefit over that of an analgesic. RESULTS: One thousand four hundred five patients (737 study 1; 668 study 2), two thirds with low back pain and one third with neck pain, were randomized to treatment. Their mean age was 42 years, and approximately 89% were white. In both studies, patients receiving cyclobenzaprine 5 or 10 mg had significantly higher mean scores on the primary efficacy measures compared with those receiving placebo (study 1-P/= 1 adverse event was reported in 54.1%, 61.8%, and 35.4% of patients receiving cyclobenzaprine 5 or 10 mg or placebo, respectively, in study 1 and by 43.9%, 55.9%, and 35.4% of patients receiving cyclobenzaprine 2.5 or 5 mg or placebo, respectively, in study 2. Adverse events were the primary reason for discontinuation of treatment in the cyclobenzaprine 5- and 10-mg groups in both studies. In study 2, ineffectiveness of therapy was the main reason for discontinuation of therapy in the group receiving cyclobenzaprine 2.5 mg. CONCLUSIONS: Cyclobenzaprine 2.5 mg TID was not significantly more effective than placebo. The cyclobenzaprine 5- and 10-mg TID regimens were associated with significantly higher mean efficacy scores compared with placebo. Cyclobenzaprine 5 mg TID was as effective as 10 mg TID, and was associated with a lower incidence of sedation.

Cyclobenzaprine pharmacokinetics, including the effects of age, gender, and hepatic insufficiency.

The pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of cyclobenzaprine, a widely used muscle relaxant, were investigated in four clinical studies, and the effects of age, gender, and hepatic insufficiency were characterized. Cyclobenzaprine plasma clearance was 689 ml/min, and the bioavailability of a 5 mg oral dose was 0.55. Following oral doses of 2.5 to 10 mg tid in healthy young subjects, cyclobenzaprine pharmacokinetics were linear, and plasma concentrations generally increased proportional to dose. There was about a fourfold accumulation of the drug in plasma on multiple dosing, corresponding to an effective half-life of 18 hours. Steady-state plasma concentrations of cyclobenzaprine in elderly subjects were twice as high as in young subjects following oral doses of 5 mg tid. Steady-state plasma concentration also appeared to be up to twofold higher in subjects with mild hepatic insufficiency compared to healthy controls. The magnitude of any difference in steady-state plasma concentration between males and females appears to be small relative to intersubject variability. A reduction in dose or dosing frequency should be considered in the elderly and in patients with liver disease.