Olawale Osuntokun

Comparison of ixekizumab with etanercept or placebo in moderate-to-severe psoriasis (UNCOVER-2 and UNCOVER-3): results from two phase 3 randomised trials

BACKGROUND Ixekizumab is a humanised monoclonal antibody against the proinflammatory cytokine interleukin 17A. We report two studies of ixekizumab compared with placebo or etanercept to assess the safety and efficacy of specifically targeting interleukin 17A in patients with widespread moderate-to-severe psoriasis. METHODS In two prospective, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 studies (UNCOVER-2 and UNCOVER-3), eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had a confirmed diagnosis of chronic plaque psoriasis at least 6 months before baseline (randomisation), 10% or greater body-surface area involvement at both screening and baseline visits, at least a moderate clinical severity as measured by a static physician global assessment (sPGA) score of 3 or more, and a psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) score of 12. Participants were randomly assigned (1:2:2:2) by computer-generated random sequence with an interactive voice response system to receive subcutaneous placebo, etanercept (50 mg twice weekly), or one injection of 80 mg ixekizumab every 2 weeks, or every 4 weeks after a 160 mg starting dose. Blinding was maintained with a double-dummy design. Coprimary efficacy endpoints were proportions of patients achieving sPGA score 0 or 1 and 75% or greater improvement in PASI at week 12. Analysis was by intention to treat. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT01597245 and NCT01646177. FINDINGS Between May 30, 2012, and Dec 30, 2013, 1224 patients in UNCOVER-2 were randomly assigned to receive subcutaneous placebo (n=168), etanercept (n=358), or ixekizumab every 2 weeks (n=351) or every 4 weeks (n=347); between Aug 11, 2012, and Feb 27, 2014, 1346 patients in UNCOVER-3 were randomly assigned to receive placebo (n=193), etanercept (n=382), ixekizumab every 2 weeks (n=385), or ixekizumab every 4 weeks (n=386). At week 12, both primary endpoints were met in both studies. For UNCOVER-2 and UNCOVER-3 respectively, in the ixekizumab every 2 weeks group, PASI 75 was achieved by 315 (response rate 89·7%; [effect size 87·4% (97·5% CI 82·9-91·8) vs placebo; 48·1% (41·2-55·0) vs etanercept]) and 336 (87·3%; [80·0% (74·4-85·7) vs placebo; 33·9% (27·0-40·7) vs etanercept]) patients; in the ixekizumab every 4 weeks group, by 269 (77·5%; [75·1% (69·5-80·8) vs placebo; 35·9% (28·2-43·6) vs etanercept]) and 325 (84·2%; [76·9% (71·0-82·8) vs placebo; 30·8% (23·7-37·9) vs etanercept]) patients; in the placebo group, by four (2·4%) and 14 (7·3%) patients; and in the etanercept group by 149 (41·6%) and 204 (53·4%) patients (all p<0·0001 vs placebo or etanercept). In the ixekizumab every 2 weeks group, sPGA 0/1 was achieved by 292 (response rate 83·2%; [effect size 80·8% (97·5% CI 75·6-86·0) vs placebo; 47·2% (39·9-54·4) vs etanercept]) and 310 (80·5%; [73·8% (67·7-79·9) vs placebo; 38·9% (31·7-46·1) vs etanercept]) patients; in the ixekizumab every 4 weeks group by 253 (72·9%; [70·5% (64·6-76·5) vs placebo; 36·9% (29·1-44·7) vs etanercept]) and 291 (75·4%; [68·7% (62·3-75·0) vs placebo; 33·8% (26·3-41·3) vs etanercept]) patients; in the placebo group by four (2·4%) and 13 (6·7%) patients; and in the etanercept group by 129 (36·0%) and 159 (41·6%) patients (all p<0·0001 vs placebo or etanercept). In combined studies, serious adverse events were reported in 14 (1·9%) of 734 patients given ixekizumab every 2 weeks, 14 (1·9%) of 729 given ixekizumab every 4 weeks, seven (1·9%) of 360 given placebo, and 14 (1·9%) of 739 given etanercept; no deaths were noted. INTERPRETATION Both ixekizumab dose regimens had greater efficacy than placebo and etanercept over 12 weeks in two independent studies. These studies show that selectively neutralising interleukin 17A with a high affinity antibody potentially gives patients with psoriasis a new and effective biological therapy option. FUNDING Eli Lilly and Co.

Phase 3 Trials of Ixekizumab in Moderate-to-Severe Plaque Psoriasis

BACKGROUND Two phase 3 trials (UNCOVER-2 and UNCOVER-3) showed that at 12 weeks of treatment, ixekizumab, a monoclonal antibody against interleukin-17A, was superior to placebo and etanercept in the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis. We report the 60-week data from the UNCOVER-2 and UNCOVER-3 trials, as well as 12-week and 60-week data from a third phase 3 trial, UNCOVER-1. METHODS We randomly assigned 1296 patients in the UNCOVER-1 trial, 1224 patients in the UNCOVER-2 trial, and 1346 patients in the UNCOVER-3 trial to receive subcutaneous injections of placebo (placebo group), 80 mg of ixekizumab every 2 weeks after a starting dose of 160 mg (2-wk dosing group), or 80 mg of ixekizumab every 4 weeks after a starting dose of 160 mg (4-wk dosing group). Additional cohorts in the UNCOVER-2 and UNCOVER-3 trials were randomly assigned to receive 50 mg of etanercept twice weekly. At week 12 in the UNCOVER-3 trial, the patients entered a long-term extension period during which they received 80 mg of ixekizumab every 4 weeks through week 60; at week 12 in the UNCOVER-1 and UNCOVER-2 trials, the patients who had a response to ixekizumab (defined as a static Physicians Global Assessment [sPGA] score of 0 [clear] or 1 [minimal psoriasis]) were randomly reassigned to receive placebo, 80 mg of ixekizumab every 4 weeks, or 80 mg of ixekizumab every 12 weeks through week 60. Coprimary end points were the percentage of patients who had a score on the sPGA of 0 or 1 and a 75% or greater reduction from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) at week 12. RESULTS In the UNCOVER-1 trial, at week 12, the patients had better responses to ixekizumab than to placebo; in the 2-wk dosing group, 81.8% had an sPGA score of 0 or 1 and 89.1% had a PASI 75 response; in the 4-wk dosing group, the respective rates were 76.4% and 82.6%; and in the placebo group, the rates were 3.2% and 3.9% (P<0.001 for all comparisons of ixekizumab with placebo). In the UNCOVER-1 and UNCOVER-2 trials, among the patients who were randomly reassigned at week 12 to receive 80 mg of ixekizumab every 4 weeks, 80 mg of ixekizumab every 12 weeks, or placebo, an sPGA score of 0 or 1 was maintained by 73.8%, 39.0%, and 7.0% of the patients, respectively. Patients in the UNCOVER-3 trial received continuous treatment of ixekizumab from weeks 0 through 60, and at week 60, at least 73% had an sPGA score of 0 or 1 and at least 80% had a PASI 75 response. Adverse events reported during ixekizumab use included neutropenia, candidal infections, and inflammatory bowel disease. CONCLUSIONS In three phase 3 trials involving patients with psoriasis, ixekizumab was effective through 60 weeks of treatment. As with any treatment, the benefits need to be weighed against the risks of adverse events. The efficacy and safety of ixekizumab beyond 60 weeks of treatment are not yet known. (Funded by Eli Lilly; UNCOVER-1, UNCOVER-2, and UNCOVER-3 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers NCT01474512, NCT01597245, and NCT01646177, respectively.).

A multicenter, inpatient, phase 2, double-blind, placebo-controlled dose-ranging study of LY2140023 monohydrate in patients with DSM-IV schizophrenia

The primary objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that 1 or more dose levels of LY2140023 monohydrate, an oral prodrug of the potent metabotropic glutamate (mGlu) 2/3 receptor agonist LY404039, given to patients with schizophrenia for 4 weeks would demonstrate significantly greater efficacy than placebo. The HBBI study was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel, placebo- and active-controlled trial. Male and female patients aged 18 to 65 years who met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) criteria for schizophrenia were randomized in a 2:2:2:2:2:1 ratio to receive 5-, 20-, 40-, or 80-mg LY2140023 monohydrate twice daily, placebo twice daily, or placebo (am) and 15 mg of olanzapine (pm) daily. Efficacy was defined as the change from baseline on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score assessed at 4 weeks. The primary analysis did not show that any of the 4 LY2140023 monohydrate doses were more efficacious than placebo as measured by the PANSS total score. Similarly, olanzapine did not significantly separate from placebo. A higher-than-anticipated treatment effect (14.6-point improvement) in the placebo group was observed on PANSS total score. LY2140023 monohydrate was generally well tolerated, although 4 patients reported the serious adverse event of convulsion. LY2140023 monohydrate-treated patients showed little change in dopamine-related adverse events and weight. The results of the HBBI study are considered to be inconclusive because LY2140023 monohydrate and the active control olanzapine did not separate from placebo in the treatment of patients with acutely exacerbated schizophrenia. Additional efficacy, safety, and tolerability testing are needed.

Therapeutic Options for Treatment-Resistant Depression

Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) presents major challenges for both patients and clinicians. There is no universally accepted definition of TRD, but results from the US National Institute of Mental Health’s (NIMH) STAR*D (Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression) programme indicate that after the failure of two treatment trials, the chances of remission decrease significantly.Several pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments for TRD may be considered when optimized (adequate dose and duration) therapy has not produced a successful outcome and a patient is classified as resistant to treatment. Nonpharmacological strategies include psychotherapy (often in conjunction with pharmacotherapy), electroconvulsive therapy and vagus nerve stimulation. The US FDA recently approved vagus nerve stimulation as adjunctive therapy (after four prior treatment failures); however, its benefits are seen only after prolonged (up to 1 year) use. Other nonpharmacological options, such as repetitive transcranial stimulation, deep brain stimulation or psychosurgery, remain experimental and are not widely available.Pharmacological treatments of TRD can be grouped in two main categories: ‘switching’ or ‘combining’. In the first, treatment is switched within and between classes of compounds. The benefits of switching include avoidance of polypharmacy, a narrower range of treatment-emergent adverse events and lower costs. An inherent disadvantage of any switching strategy is that partial treatment responses resulting from the initial treatment might be lost by its discontinuation in favour of another medication trial. Monotherapy switches have also been shown to have limited effectiveness in achieving remission.The advantage of combination strategies is the potential to build upon achieved improvements; they are generally recommended if partial response was achieved with the current treatment trial. Various non-antidepressant augmenting agents, such as lithium and thyroid hormones, are well studied, although not commonly used. There is also evidence of efficacy and increasing use of atypical antipsychotics in combination with antidepressants, for example, olanzapine in combination with fluoxetine (OFC) or augmentation with aripiprazole. The disadvantages of a combination strategy include multiple medications, a broader range of treatment-emergent adverse events and higher costs.Several experimental pharmaceutical treatment alternatives for TRD are also being explored in combination with antidepressants or as monotherapy. These less studied alternative compounds include pindolol, inositol, CNS stimulants, hormones, herbal supplements, omega-3 fatty acids, S-adenosyl-L-methionine, folic acid, lamotrigine, modafinil, riluzole and topiramate.In summary, despite an increasing variety of choices for the treatment of TRD, this condition remains universally undefined and represents an area of unmet medical need. There are few known approved pharmacological agents for TRD (aripiprazole and OFC) and overall outcomes remain poor. This might be an indication that depression itself is a heterogeneous condition with a great diversity of pathologies, highlighting the need for careful evaluation of individuals with depressive symptoms who are unresponsive to treatment. Clearly, more research is needed to provide clinicians with better guidance in making those treatment decisions — especially in light of accumulating evidence that the longer patients are unsuccessfully treated, the worse their long-term prognosis tends to be.

Olanzapine plus carbamazepine v. carbamazepine alone in treating manic episodes

BACKGROUND Combinations of olanzapine and carbamazepine are often used in clinical practice in the management of mania. AIMS To assess the efficacy and safety of olanzapine plus carbamazepine in mixed and manic bipolar episodes. METHOD Randomised, double-blind, 6-week trial of olanzapine (10-30 mg/day) plus carbamazepine (400-1200 mg/day; n=58) v. placebo plus carbamazepine (n=60) followed by open-label, 20-week olanzapine (10-30 mg/day) plus carbamazepine (400-1200 mg/day, n=86), with change in manic symptoms as main outcome measure. Safety and pharmacokinetics were also evaluated. RESULTS There were no significant differences (baseline to endpoint) in efficacy measures between treatment groups, but at 6 weeks triglyceride levels were significantly higher (P=0.008) and potentially clinically significant weight gain (>or=7%) occurred more frequently (24.6% v. 3.4%, P=0.002) in the combined olanzapine and carbamazepine group. Carbamazepine reduced olanzapine concentrations but olanzapine had no effect on carbamazepine concentrations. CONCLUSIONS The combination of olanzapine and carbamazepine did not have superior efficacy to carbamazepine alone. The increases in weight and triglycerides observed during combination treatment are a matter of concern.

Comparison of Long-Term (At Least 24 Weeks) Weight Gain and Metabolic Changes Between Adolescents and Adults Treated with Olanzapine

OBJECTIVE The purpose of these analyses was to compare the weight and other metabolic changes between adolescents and adults during long-term (at least 24 weeks) olanzapine treatment. METHOD The adult database included 86 studies with 12,425 patients with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, depression, borderline personality disorder, or bipolar I disorder; the adolescent database comprised six studies with 489 patients with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, borderline personality disorder, bipolar I disorder, or prodromal psychosis. Patients who had at least 24 weeks of olanzapine exposure (N=4,280 from adult database and N=179 from adolescent database) were analyzed in this study. Weight data were collected for all patients, fasting glucose and lipids data were collected in some patients. For weight gain, data in 34.5% adults (4,280/12,425) and 36.6% adolescents (179/489) were analyzed while for glucose and lipids, data in 8.4% (1,038/12,425) adults and 24.9% adolescents (122/489) were analyzed. Adult patients were treated with oral (5-20 mg/day) or depot formulations (doses equivalent to oral doses of 5-20 mg/day) of olanzapine and adolescent patients were treated with oral olanzapine (2.5-20 mg/day). The incidences of potentially clinically significant categorical changes in weight and metabolic parameters were calculated with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Nonoverlapping 95% CIs were considered as indicating a statistically significant difference. Weight, lipid, and glucose change comparisons are summarized. RESULTS The mean age for adolescents and adults was 15.8 and 38.8, respectively. The percentage of the male population was similar for both adults (58.5%) and adolescents (62.8%). The median duration of the follow-up period was 201 days for adolescent database and 280 days for adult database. The mean weight gain from baseline to endpoint in adolescents was 11.24 kg when compared with 4.81 kg in adults. The 95% CI for adolescents (10.1, 12.4) and adults (4.57, 5.04) are not overlapping, which indicates that the difference between adolescents and adults is statistically significant. The percentage of olanzapine-treated adolescents with ≥ 7% mean weight gain was 89.4% compared with 55.4% in adults (Number need to harm [NNH]=3). Mean changes from baseline to endpoint were also greater for adolescents than for adults in fasting total cholesterol (5.49 mg/dL vs. 2.06 mg/dL), LDL (5.41 mg/dL vs. 0.49 mg/dL), and triglycerides (20.49 mg/dL vs. 16.72 mg/dL), but overlapping 95% CIs were observed for all lipid parameters. Mean changes from baseline to endpoint in fasting glucose values were similar between adolescents and adults (3.13 mg/dL vs. 3.95 mg/dL). However, the incidence of treatment-emergent significant glucose changes was greater in adults. Among olanzapine-treated adults and adolescents, 8.9% and 0.9% experienced a shift from normal to high and 12.5% and 3.3% experienced a shift from normal/impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) to high fasting glucose, respectively. The incidence of IGT to high elevations in glucose was greater in adolescents, but overlapping 95% CI was observed. CONCLUSIONS The types of metabolic changes during the long-term olanzapine treatment in adolescents were similar to those observed in adults. However, the magnitude of changes in weight and lipid parameters was greater in adolescents. Patients should receive regular monitoring of weight, fasting blood glucose, and lipid profile at the beginning of, and periodically during, treatment with olanzapine.

Factors associated with adherence to treatment with olanzapine and other atypical antipsychotic medications in patients with schizophrenia

OBJECTIVES Poor treatment response is an important factor contributing to lack of treatment adherence. The goals of this research were to determine whether improvements in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) symptom domains predict the likelihood of staying on treatment and whether differential responses to treatment with various atypical antipsychotics in specific symptom domains account for differences in discontinuation rates or treatment adherence. METHODS We conducted a post-hoc analysis of pooled data from 5 randomized, double-blind, 24- to 28-week clinical trials in 1103 olanzapine-treated and 1090 risperidone-, quetiapine-, ziprasidone-, or aripiprazole-treated adult patients with schizophrenia. The 5 PANSS factors were tested as potential predictors of treatment adherence for all treatment groups combined. Treatment differences in the 5 PANSS factors and individual items were assessed between olanzapine and the other atypical antipsychotics combined. Secondary analyses repeated for the 21 Heinrichs Quality of Life Scale (QLS) items. RESULTS Improvement in PANSS positive factor was the strongest predictor of treatment adherence, irrespective of medication (based on standardized scores, hazard ratio [HR], 1.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], +1.40 to +1.79; P < .001). Improvement in PANSS hostility (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, +1.11 to +1.37; P < .001) and depressive (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, +1.05 to +1.27; P = .002) factors was also a significant predictor; negative and disorganized thoughts factors were not. All QLS items had significant predictive effects. Olanzapine-treated patients showed significantly greater improvements than all other groups at week 24 on all 5 PANSS factors (P = .028 for negative; P < .001 for all others) and on 3 QLS items. CONCLUSION Significant improvement in positive symptoms, regardless of treatment, followed by significant improvement in hostility and depressive symptoms, may best predict treatment adherence. Olanzapine-treated patients experienced significantly greater improvements in these specific symptoms than patients treated with the other atypical antipsychotics examined. These findings may further explain why olanzapine-treated patients continue treatment more often.

Efficacy and safety of ixekizumab treatment for Japanese patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, erythrodermic psoriasis and generalized pustular psoriasis: Results from a 52-week, open-label, phase 3 study (UNCOVER-J)

Psoriasis, a chronic, immune‐mediated skin disease characterized by red, scaly plaques, affects approximately 0.3% of the population in Japan. The aim of this open‐label study was to evaluate the long‐term efficacy and safety of ixekizumab, a humanized, anti‐interleukin‐17A monoclonal antibody, in Japanese patients with plaque psoriasis (n = 78, including 11 psoriatic arthritis), erythrodermic psoriasis (n = 8) and generalized pustular psoriasis (n = 5). Ixekizumab was administrated s.c. at baseline (week 0, 160 mg), from weeks 2 to 12 (80 mg every 2 weeks), and from weeks 16 to 52 (80 mg every 4 weeks). At week 52, 92.3% of patients with plaque psoriasis achieved Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75, 80.8% achieved PASI 90, 48.7% achieved PASI 100, and 52.6% had remission of plaques (by static Physician Global Assessment, sPGA [0]). Difficult to treat areas of psoriasis (nail or scalp) also responded to ixekizumab. All patients with psoriatic arthritis who were assessed (5/5) achieved an American College of Rheumatology 20 response. Most patients with erythrodermic psoriasis or generalized pustular psoriasis responded to ixekizumab and the clinical outcome was maintained over 52 weeks (75% and 60% of patients achieved sPGA [0, 1] at week 52, respectively). Mostly mild or moderate treatment‐emergent adverse events were reported by 79 of 91 patients; the most common were nasopharyngitis, eczema, seborrheic dermatitis, urticaria and injection site reactions. In conclusion, 52‐week ixekizumab treatment was efficacious and well tolerated in Japanese patients with plaque psoriasis. Efficacy was also observed in patients with erythrodermic psoriasis, generalized pustular psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis.

Efficacy and Safety of Olanzapine/Fluoxetine Combination vs Fluoxetine Monotherapy Following Successful Combination Therapy of Treatment-Resistant Major Depressive Disorder

This study assessed prevention of relapse in patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) taking olanzapine/fluoxetine combination (OFC). Patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who failed to satisfactorily respond to ⩾2 different antidepressants for ⩾6 weeks within the current MDD episode were acutely treated for 6–8 weeks, followed by stabilization (12 weeks) on OFC. Those who remained stable were randomized to OFC or fluoxetine for up to 27 weeks. Time-to-relapse was the primary efficacy outcome defined as 50% increase in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale score with Clinical Global Impressions−Severity of Depression score of ⩾4; hospitalization for depression or suicidality; or discontinuation for lack of efficacy or worsening of depression or suicidality. A total of 444 patients were randomized 1:1 to OFC (N=221) or fluoxetine (N=223). Time-to-relapse was significantly longer in OFC-treated patients compared with fluoxetine-treated patients (p<0.001). Treatment-emergent weight gain and some mean and categorical fasting metabolic changes were significantly greater in OFC-treated patients. Clinically significant weight gain (⩾7%) was observed in 55.7% of patients who remained on OFC throughout the study, including the relapse-prevention phase (up to 47 weeks). There were no significant differences between patients treated with OFC and fluoxetine in extrapyramidal symptoms or serious adverse events. We believe this is the first controlled relapse-prevention study in subjects with TRD that supports continued use of a second-generation antipsychotic beyond stabilization. A thorough assessment of benefits and risks (in particular metabolic changes) associated with continuing treatment with OFC or fluoxetine must be done based on individual patient needs.

Patient perspectives on antipsychotic treatments and their association with clinical outcomes

This analysis examined patient-reported attitudes toward antipsychotic medication and the relationship of these attitudes with clinical outcomes and pharmacotherapy adherence. The analysis included three randomized, double-blind studies in patients with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or schizophreniform disorder diagnosed according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4th Edition and randomly assigned to treatment with olanzapine 5–20 mg/day or another antipsychotic (haloperidol 2–20 mg/day, risperidone 2–10 mg/day, or ziprasidone 80–160 mg/day). Patient-reported improvements were significantly greater for olanzapine (n = 488) versus other treatments (haloperidol n = 145, risperidone n = 158, or ziprasidone n = 271) on multiple Drug Attitude Inventory items. A positive attitude toward medication reported by patients was significantly associated with greater clinical improvement on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale and lower discontinuation rates. These results suggest that patients’ perceptions of treatment benefits are associated with objective clinical measures, including reduction of symptom severity and lower discontinuation rates. Furthermore, olanzapine may be associated with more positive treatment attitudes. These findings may contribute to a better understanding of reasons for treatment adherence from patients’ own perspectives.