Jason Gong

Varenicline versus transdermal nicotine patch for smoking cessation: Results from a randomised, open-label trial

Background: Varenicline, a new treatment for smoking cessation, has demonstrated significantly greater efficacy over placebo and sustained release bupropion (bupropion SR). A study was undertaken to compare a 12-week standard regimen of varenicline with a 10-week standard regimen of transdermal nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for smoking cessation. Methods: In this 52-week, open-label, randomised, multicentre, phase 3 trial conducted in Belgium, France, the Netherlands, UK and USA, participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive varenicline uptitrated to 1 mg twice daily for 12 weeks or transdermal NRT (21 mg/day reducing to 7 mg/day) for 10 weeks. Non-treatment follow-up continued to week 52. The primary outcome was the biochemically confirmed (exhaled carbon monoxide ⩽10 ppm) self-reported continuous abstinence rate (CAR) for the last 4 weeks of the treatment period in participants who had taken at least one dose of treatment. Secondary outcomes included CAR from the last 4 weeks of treatment through weeks 24 and 52, and measures of craving, withdrawal and smoking satisfaction. Results: A total of 376 and 370 participants assigned to varenicline and NRT, respectively, were eligible for analysis. The CAR for the last 4 weeks of treatment was significantly greater for varenicline (55.9%) than NRT (43.2%; OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.28, p<0.001). The week 52 CAR (NRT, weeks 8–52; varenicline, weeks 9–52) was 26.1% for varenicline and 20.3% for NRT (OR 1.40, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.99, p = 0.056). Varenicline significantly reduced craving (p<0.001), withdrawal symptoms (p<0.001) and smoking satisfaction (p<0.001) compared with NRT. The most frequent adverse event was nausea (varenicline, 37.2%; NRT, 9.7%). Conclusions: The outcomes of this trial established that abstinence from smoking was greater and craving, withdrawal symptoms and smoking satisfaction were less at the end of treatment with varenicline than with transdermal NRT. Trial registration number: NCT00143325.

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

ABSTRACT 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 ≥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. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00143299.

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

Study Type – Therapy (RCT)
Level of Evidence 1b

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.

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.

Effects of flexible-dose fesoterodine on overactive bladder symptoms and treatment satisfaction: an open-label study.

Aims:  To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of flexible‐dose fesoterodine in subjects with overactive bladder (OAB) who were dissatisfied with previous tolterodine treatment.

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

Study Type – Therapy (RCT)

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

Study Type – Therapy (cohort)

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.

Early onset of fesoterodine efficacy in subjects with overactive bladder

Study Type – Therapy (cohort) Level of Evidence 2b