A Prospective, Randomized, Open-Label Study to Evaluate Two Management Strategies for Gastrointestinal Symptoms in Patients Newly on Treatment with Dabigatran.

INTRODUCTION: In the pivotal RE-LY trial, dabigatran etexilate (DE) at the dose of 150-mg twice daily (BID), significantly reduced total stroke and ischemic stroke compared with warfarin in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), while the 110-mg BID dose had efficacy equivalent to warfarin, and major bleeds were significantly reduced. Both DE regimens were generally well tolerated; however, approximately 4% of the patients discontinued treatment with DE due to gastrointestinal (GI) discomfort. METHODS: Clinical trial NCT01493557 was a multicenter, randomized, active control, open-label study to assess the efficacy of two simple GI symptom (GIS) management strategies in DE-treated patients who developed GIS: (1) concurrent treatment with the proton pump inhibitor pantoprazole (DE-P), or (2) ingestion of DE after a meal (DE-M). Patients were initially randomized to either GIS management strategy. If the first did not resolve their GIS, patients had the option to "add on" the alternative strategy. RESULTS: A total of 1067 patients with NVAF received DE therapy BID for 3 months (United States, 150-mg or 75-mg; Canada, 150-mg or 110-mg). Of these, 117 (11%) patients reported GIS and were randomized to one of two GIS management strategies. At 4 weeks, a significantly higher rate of complete or partial effectiveness was observed in patients on DE-P than in those receiving DE-M, [50/58 (86.2%) versus 40/59 (67.8%), respectively; p = 0.0273]. Patients with ongoing GIS were asked to "add on" the alternate strategy for an additional 4 weeks. Overall, 92/117 (78.6%) of randomized patients experienced complete or partial effectiveness using either the initial strategy or a combination of the two strategies: DE-P, 47 (81.0%); and DE-M, 45 (76.3%, no significant difference) (by initial strategy). CONCLUSION: The majority of patients enrolled either did not experience GIS at all, or their GIS resolved using either one individually, or a combination of the two strategies described. TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01493557.

Efficacy and Safety of Linagliptin in Black/African American Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A 6-month, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study.

OBJECTIVE: Although black/African American individuals are disproportionately affected by type 2 diabetes, there is scant clinical trial information available on antidiabetes therapies in this group. We compared linagliptin with placebo in black/African American adults who were treatment-naïve or receiving one oral antidiabetes drug. METHODS: Of 226 patients randomized to 24 weeks' linagliptin 5 mg/day or placebo, 208 had baseline and at least one on-treatment glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) measurement. Mean baseline HbA1c was 8.6% in the linagliptin group (n = 98) and 8.68% in the placebo group (n = 110). The primary outcome was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 24. RESULTS: By week 24, mean HbA1c changes were -0.84% with linagliptin and -0.25% with placebo (treatment difference, -0.58%; P<.001), and more patients in the linagliptin group achieved HbA1c <7.0% (26.8% vs. 8.3%; P = .001) or an HbA1c reduction ≥0.5% (54.1% vs. 30.0%; P<.001). Mean weight loss was -1.1 kg in both groups. During the treatment period, 8 of 98 linagliptin-group patients and 17 of 110 placebo-group patients required rescue therapy (odds ratio, 0.5; P = .14). For postprandial glucose, values were available for few patients (11 placebo, 10 linagliptin), and thus the between-group difference was associated with wide confidence intervals (CIs) (difference, -1.97 mg/dL; 95% CI, -53.80 to 49.86; P = .94). In the overall study population, a similar proportion of patients in both groups had adverse events (58.5% vs. 61.7%); most events were mild or moderate and considered unrelated to study drug. Investigator-defined hypoglycemia was rare (3 linagliptin-group patients and 1 placebo-group patient), with no severe events (requiring external assistance). CONCLUSION: This study confirms that linagliptin is efficacious and well tolerated in black/African American patients with type 2 diabetes.

Black/African American patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: study design and baseline patient characteristics from a randomized clinical trial of linagliptin.

OBJECTIVE: In the United States, black/African American individuals are more likely than whites to develop type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and have higher rates of complications, but are under-represented in clinical trials. The design of a trial comparing the efficacy and safety of the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor linagliptin 5 mg/day with placebo in this patient group, and the characteristics of the patients enrolled are reported. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This United States, multicenter, 24-week, randomized, double-blind study enrolled adults with T2DM who self-reported their race as black or African American, were receiving ≤ 1 oral antidiabetes drug, had a body mass index ≤ 45 kg/m(2) and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) of 7.5 - 11% at screening. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary efficacy endpoint is the change of HbA(1c) from baseline to week 24. BASELINE DATA: A total of 226 patients were randomized and received ≥ 1 study drug dose. The mean age was 54 years (standard deviation: 9.9 years), and 54% were men. The mean HbA(1c) was 8.75% (standard deviation: 1.10%). Approximately half the patients (52%) had mild or moderate renal impairment and the majority (72%) had hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: To the authors' knowledge, this is the first trial of any oral antidiabetes drug specifically conducted in black/African American patients.

Impulse control disorders in Parkinson disease: a multicenter case--control study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess factors associated with impulse control disorders (ICDs) in Parkinson disease (PD) using a multicenter case--control design. METHODS: Patients enrolled in the DOMINION study, a multicenter study assessing the cross-sectional frequency of ICDs in PD, were eligible to participate in the case--control study. PD patients with and without an ICD (n = 282 each) (compulsive gambling, buying, sexual behavior, and eating) were matched individually on age, gender, and dopamine agonist treatment. Subjects were assessed with a comprehensive neurological, psychiatric, and cognitive assessment battery. RESULTS: ICD patients reported more functional impairment (p < 0.001); greater depressive (p < 0.0001), state (p < 0.0001), and trait (p < 0.0001) anxiety; greater obsessive-compulsive symptoms (p < 0.0001); higher novelty-seeking (p < 0.001) and impulsivity (p < 0.001); and differences in reward preference reflecting greater choice impulsivity (p < 0.05). Patients with multiple ICDs had greater dyskinesia scores compared to those with single ICDs. INTERPRETATION: ICDs in PD are associated with multiple psychiatric and cognitive impairments, including affective and anxiety symptoms, as well as elevated obsessionality, novelty seeking, and impulsivity. These results highlight the importance of assessing multiple mental health domains in individuals with PD and ICDs, and suggest possible pathophysiological mechanisms and risk indicators for these disorders.

Amantadine use associated with impulse control disorders in Parkinson disease in cross-sectional study.

A recent controlled clinical trial suggested a role for amantadine as a treatment for pathological gambling in patients with Parkinson disease (PD). Analyzing data from a large cross-sectional study of impulse control disorders (ICDs) in PD, amantadine use (n = 728), vs no amantadine use (n = 2,357), was positively associated with a diagnosis of any ICD (17.6% vs 12.4%, p < 0.001) and compulsive gambling specifically (7.4% vs 4.2%, p < 0.001). This amantadine association remained after controlling for covariates of amantadine use, including both dopamine agonist use and levodopa dosage. Further research, including larger clinical trials, is needed to assess the role of amantadine in the development and treatment of ICDs in PD.

Impulse control disorders in Parkinson disease: a cross-sectional study of 3090 patients.

CONTEXT: An association between dopamine-replacement therapies and impulse control disorders (ICDs) in Parkinson disease (PD) has been suggested in preliminary studies. OBJECTIVES: To ascertain point prevalence estimates of 4 ICDs in PD and examine their associations with dopamine-replacement therapies and other clinical characteristics. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study using an a priori established sampling procedure for subject recruitment and raters blinded to PD medication status. PATIENTS: Three thousand ninety patients with treated idiopathic PD receiving routine clinical care at 46 movement disorder centers in the United States and Canada. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The Massachusetts Gambling Screen score for current problem/pathological gambling, the Minnesota Impulsive Disorders Interview score for compulsive sexual behavior and buying, and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders research criteria for binge-eating disorder. RESULTS: An ICD was identified in 13.6% of patients (gambling in 5.0%, compulsive sexual behavior in 3.5%, compulsive buying in 5.7%, and binge-eating disorder in 4.3%), and 3.9% had 2 or more ICDs. Impulse control disorders were more common in patients treated with a dopamine agonist than in patients not taking a dopamine agonist (17.1% vs 6.9%; odds ratio [OR], 2.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.08-3.54; P < .001). Impulse control disorder frequency was similar for pramipexole and ropinirole (17.7% vs 15.5%; OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.94-1.57; P = .14). Additional variables independently associated with ICDs were levodopa use, living in the United States, younger age, being unmarried, current cigarette smoking, and a family history of gambling problems. CONCLUSIONS: Dopamine agonist treatment in PD is associated with 2- to 3.5-fold increased odds of having an ICD. This association represents a drug class relationship across ICDs. The association of other demographic and clinical variables with ICDs suggests a complex relationship that requires additional investigation to optimize prevention and treatment strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00617019.

Malignant melanoma and levodopa in Parkinson's disease: causality or coincidence?

Levodopa is the major drug used in the treatment of patients with Parkinson's disease. However, levodopa continues to be 'contra-indicated' for patients with Parkinson's disease associated with malignant melanoma. Case reports have suggested that levodopa has a causal relationship with malignant melanoma due to their shared dopamine biochemical pathway. Clinical characteristics of 54 patients with both Parkinson's disease and melanoma were analyzed (43 cases from the literature and 11 from our institution). The results suggest that the occurrence of both Parkinson's disease and melanoma in these patients is coincidental rather than causal. It did not appear that the Parkinson's disease patients on levodopa therapy were predisposed to melanoma, nor did levodopa therapy appear to exaggerate melanoma if it were previously present.