Patrick P. J. Phillips

Donepezil and Memantine for Moderate-to-Severe Alzheimer's Disease

BACKGROUND Clinical trials have shown the benefits of cholinesterase inhibitors for the treatment of mild-to-moderate Alzheimers disease. It is not known whether treatment benefits continue after the progression to moderate-to-severe disease. METHODS We assigned 295 community-dwelling patients who had been treated with donepezil for at least 3 months and who had moderate or severe Alzheimers disease (a score of 5 to 13 on the Standardized Mini-Mental State Examination [SMMSE, on which scores range from 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating better cognitive function]) to continue donepezil, discontinue donepezil, discontinue donepezil and start memantine, or continue donepezil and start memantine. Patients received the study treatment for 52 weeks. The coprimary outcomes were scores on the SMMSE and on the Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale (BADLS, on which scores range from 0 to 60, with higher scores indicating greater impairment). The minimum clinically important differences were 1.4 points on the SMMSE and 3.5 points on the BADLS. RESULTS Patients assigned to continue donepezil, as compared with those assigned to discontinue donepezil, had a score on the SMMSE that was higher by an average of 1.9 points (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3 to 2.5) and a score on the BADLS that was lower (indicating less impairment) by 3.0 points (95% CI, 1.8 to 4.3) (P<0.001 for both comparisons). Patients assigned to receive memantine, as compared with those assigned to receive memantine placebo, had a score on the SMMSE that was an average of 1.2 points higher (95% CI, 0.6 to 1.8; P<0.001) and a score on the BADLS that was 1.5 points lower (95% CI, 0.3 to 2.8; P=0.02). The efficacy of donepezil and of memantine did not differ significantly in the presence or absence of the other. There were no significant benefits of the combination of donepezil and memantine over donepezil alone. CONCLUSIONS In patients with moderate or severe Alzheimers disease, continued treatment with donepezil was associated with cognitive benefits that exceeded the minimum clinically important difference and with significant functional benefits over the course of 12 months. (Funded by the U.K. Medical Research Council and the U.K. Alzheimers Society; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN49545035.).

Four-Month Moxifloxacin-Based Regimens for Drug-Sensitive Tuberculosis

BACKGROUND Early-phase and preclinical studies suggest that moxifloxacin-containing regimens could allow for effective 4-month treatment of uncomplicated, smear-positive pulmonary tuberculosis. METHODS We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial to test the noninferiority of two moxifloxacin-containing regimens as compared with a control regimen. One group of patients received isoniazid, rifampin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol for 8 weeks, followed by 18 weeks of isoniazid and rifampin (control group). In the second group, we replaced ethambutol with moxifloxacin for 17 weeks, followed by 9 weeks of placebo (isoniazid group), and in the third group, we replaced isoniazid with moxifloxacin for 17 weeks, followed by 9 weeks of placebo (ethambutol group). The primary end point was treatment failure or relapse within 18 months after randomization. RESULTS Of the 1931 patients who underwent randomization, in the per-protocol analysis, a favorable outcome was reported in fewer patients in the isoniazid group (85%) and the ethambutol group (80%) than in the control group (92%), for a difference favoring the control group of 6.1 percentage points (97.5% confidence interval [CI], 1.7 to 10.5) versus the isoniazid group and 11.4 percentage points (97.5% CI, 6.7 to 16.1) versus the ethambutol group. Results were consistent in the modified intention-to-treat analysis and all sensitivity analyses. The hazard ratios for the time to culture negativity in both solid and liquid mediums for the isoniazid and ethambutol groups, as compared with the control group, ranged from 1.17 to 1.25, indicating a shorter duration, with the lower bounds of the 95% confidence intervals exceeding 1.00 in all cases. There was no significant difference in the incidence of grade 3 or 4 adverse events, with events reported in 127 patients (19%) in the isoniazid group, 111 (17%) in the ethambutol group, and 123 (19%) in the control group. CONCLUSIONS The two moxifloxacin-containing regimens produced a more rapid initial decline in bacterial load, as compared with the control group. However, noninferiority for these regimens was not shown, which indicates that shortening treatment to 4 months was not effective in this setting. (Funded by the Global Alliance for TB Drug Development and others; REMoxTB ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00864383.).

High-Dose Rifapentine with Moxifloxacin for Pulmonary Tuberculosis

BACKGROUND Tuberculosis regimens that are shorter and simpler than the current 6-month daily regimen are needed. METHODS We randomly assigned patients with newly diagnosed, smear-positive, drug-sensitive tuberculosis to one of three regimens: a control regimen that included 2 months of ethambutol, isoniazid, rifampicin, and pyrazinamide administered daily followed by 4 months of daily isoniazid and rifampicin; a 4-month regimen in which the isoniazid in the control regimen was replaced by moxifloxacin administered daily for 2 months followed by moxifloxacin and 900 mg of rifapentine administered twice weekly for 2 months; or a 6-month regimen in which isoniazid was replaced by daily moxifloxacin for 2 months followed by one weekly dose of both moxifloxacin and 1200 mg of rifapentine for 4 months. Sputum specimens were examined on microscopy and after culture at regular intervals. The primary end point was a composite treatment failure and relapse, with noninferiority based on a margin of 6 percentage points and 90% confidence intervals. RESULTS We enrolled a total of 827 patients from South Africa, Zimbabwe, Botswana, and Zambia; 28% of patients were coinfected with the human immunodefiency virus. In the per-protocol analysis, the proportion of patients with an unfavorable response was 4.9% in the control group, 3.2% in the 6-month group (adjusted difference from control, -1.8 percentage points; 90% confidence interval [CI], -6.1 to 2.4), and 18.2% in the 4-month group (adjusted difference from control, 13.6 percentage points; 90% CI, 8.1 to 19.1). In the modified intention-to-treat analysis these proportions were 14.4% in the control group, 13.7% in the 6-month group (adjusted difference from control, 0.4 percentage points; 90% CI, -4.7 to 5.6), and 26.9% in the 4-month group (adjusted difference from control, 13.1 percentage points; 90% CI, 6.8 to 19.4). CONCLUSIONS The 6-month regimen that included weekly administration of high-dose rifapentine and moxifloxacin was as effective as the control regimen. The 4-month regimen was not noninferior to the control regimen. (Funded by the European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership and the Wellcome Trust; RIFAQUIN Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN44153044.).

A Dose-Ranging Trial to Optimize the Dose of Rifampin in the Treatment of Tuberculosis

RATIONALE Rifampin at a dose of 10 mg/kg was introduced in 1971 based on pharmacokinetic, toxicity, and cost considerations. Available data in mice and humans showed that an increase in dose may shorten the duration of tuberculosis treatment. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the safety and tolerability, the pharmacokinetics, and the extended early bactericidal activity of increasing doses of rifampin. METHODS Patients with drug-susceptible tuberculosis were enrolled into a control group of eight patients receiving the standard dose of 10 mg/kg rifampin, followed by consecutive experimental groups with 15 patients each receiving rifampin 20, 25, 30, and 35 mg/kg, respectively, for 14 days. In all patients isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol were added in standard doses for the second 7 days of treatment. Safety, pharmacokinetics of rifampin, and fall in bacterial load were assessed. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Grade 1 and 2 adverse events were equally distributed between the five dose groups; there were five grade 3 events of which one was a possibly related hepatotoxicity. Areas under the time-concentration curves and peak serum concentrations of rifampin showed a more than proportional increase with dose. The daily fall in bacterial load over 14 days was 0.176, 0.168, 0.167, 0.265, and 0.261 log10 colony-forming units/ml sputum in the 10, 20, 25, 30, and 35 mg/kg groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Two weeks of rifampin up to 35 mg/kg was safe and well tolerated. There was a nonlinear increase in exposure to rifampin without an apparent ceiling effect and a greater estimated fall in bacterial load in the higher dosing groups. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 01392911).

High-dose rifampicin, moxifloxacin, and SQ109 for treating tuberculosis: a multi-arm, multi-stage randomised controlled trial

Summary Background Tuberculosis is the worlds leading infectious disease killer. We aimed to identify shorter, safer drug regimens for the treatment of tuberculosis. Methods We did a randomised controlled, open-label trial with a multi-arm, multi-stage design. The trial was done in seven sites in South Africa and Tanzania, including hospitals, health centres, and clinical trial centres. Patients with newly diagnosed, rifampicin-sensitive, previously untreated pulmonary tuberculosis were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1:1:2 ratio to receive (all orally) either 35 mg/kg rifampicin per day with 15–20 mg/kg ethambutol, 20 mg/kg rifampicin per day with 400 mg moxifloxacin, 20 mg/kg rifampicin per day with 300 mg SQ109, 10 mg/kg rifampicin per day with 300 mg SQ109, or a daily standard control regimen (10 mg/kg rifampicin, 5 mg/kg isoniazid, 25 mg/kg pyrazinamide, and 15–20 mg/kg ethambutol). Experimental treatments were given with oral 5 mg/kg isoniazid and 25 mg/kg pyrazinamide per day for 12 weeks, followed by 14 weeks of 5 mg/kg isoniazid and 10 mg/kg rifampicin per day. Because of the orange discoloration of body fluids with higher doses of rifampicin it was not possible to mask patients and clinicians to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was time to culture conversion in liquid media within 12 weeks. Patients without evidence of rifampicin resistance on phenotypic test who took at least one dose of study treatment and had one positive culture on liquid or solid media before or within the first 2 weeks of treatment were included in the primary analysis (modified intention to treat). Time-to-event data were analysed using a Cox proportional-hazards regression model and adjusted for minimisation variables. The proportional hazard assumption was tested using Schoelfeld residuals, with threshold p<0·05 for non-proportionality. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01785186). Findings Between May 7, 2013, and March 25, 2014, we enrolled and randomly assigned 365 patients to different treatment arms (63 to rifampicin 35 mg/kg, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol; 59 to rifampicin 10 mg/kg, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, SQ109; 57 to rifampicin 20 mg/kg, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and SQ109; 63 to rifampicin 10 mg/kg, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and moxifloxacin; and 123 to the control arm). Recruitment was stopped early in the arms containing SQ109 since prespecified efficacy thresholds were not met at the planned interim analysis. Time to stable culture conversion in liquid media was faster in the 35 mg/kg rifampicin group than in the control group (median 48 days vs 62 days, adjusted hazard ratio 1·78; 95% CI 1·22–2·58, p=0·003), but not in other experimental arms. There was no difference in any of the groups in time to culture conversion on solid media. 11 patients had treatment failure or recurrent disease during post-treatment follow-up: one in the 35 mg/kg rifampicin arm and none in the moxifloxacin arm. 45 (12%) of 365 patients reported grade 3–5 adverse events, with similar proportions in each arm. Interpretation A dose of 35 mg/kg rifampicin was safe, reduced the time to culture conversion in liquid media, and could be a promising component of future, shorter regimens. Our adaptive trial design was successfully implemented in a multi-centre, high tuberculosis burden setting, and could speed regimen development at reduced cost. Funding The study was funded by the European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials partnership (EDCTP), the German Ministry for Education and Research (BmBF), and the Medical Research Council UK (MRC).

Assessment of the sensitivity and specificity of Xpert MTB/RIF assay as an early sputum biomarker of response to tuberculosis treatment

BACKGROUND An accurate biomarker is urgently needed to monitor the response to treatment in patients with pulmonary tuberculosis. The Xpert MTB/RIF assay is a commercially available real-time PCR that can be used to detect Mycobacterium-tuberculosis-specific DNA sequences in sputum samples. We therefore evaluated this assay with serial sputum samples obtained over 26 weeks from patients undergoing treatment for tuberculosis. METHODS We analysed sputum samples from 221 patients with smear-positive tuberculosis enrolled at two sites (Cape Town, South Africa, and Mbeya, Tanzania) of a multicentre randomised clinical trial REMoxTB of antituberculosis treatment on a weekly basis (weeks 0 to 8), then at weeks 12, 17, 22, and 26 after treatment initiation. The Xpert MTB/RIF results over time were compared with the results of standard smear microscopy and culture methods. FINDINGS We obtained and analysed 2741 sputum samples from 221 patients. The reduction in positivity rates with Xpert MTB/RIF were slower than those with the standard methods. At week 8, positive results were obtained for 62 (29%) of 212 sputum samples with smear microscopy, 46 (26%) of 175 with solid culture (Löwenstein-Jensen medium), 77 (42%) of 183 with liquid culture (Bactec MGIT960 system), and 174 (84%) of 207 with Xpert MTB/RIF; at 26 weeks, positive results were obtained for ten (5%) of 199, four (3%) of 157, seven (4%) of 169, and 22 (27%) of 83 sputum samples, respectively. The reduction in detection of quantitative M tuberculosis DNA with Xpert MTB/RIF correlated with smear grades (ρ=-0·74; p<0·0001), solid culture grades (ρ=-0·73; p<0·0001), and time to liquid culture positivity (ρ=0·73; p<0·0001). Compared with the combined binary smear and culture results as a reference standard, the Xpert MTB/RIF assay had high sensitivity (97·0%, 95% CI 95·8-97·9), but poor specificity (48·6%, 45·0-52·2). INTERPRETATION The poor specificity precludes the use of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay as a biomarker for monitoring tuberculosis treatment, and should not replace standard smear microscopy and culture. FUNDING Global Alliance for TB Drug Development, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, UK Medical Research Council, German Ministry of Science and Technology.

Determining the minimum clinically important differences for outcomes in the DOMINO trial

Although less likely to be reported in clinical trials than expressions of the statistical significance of differences in outcomes, whether or not a treatment has delivered a specified minimum clinically important difference (MCID) is also relevant to patients and their caregivers and doctors. Many dementia treatment randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have not reported MCIDs and, where they have been done, observed differences have not reached these.

An Evaluation of Culture Results during Treatment for Tuberculosis as Surrogate Endpoints for Treatment Failure and Relapse

It is widely acknowledged that new regimens are urgently needed for the treatment of tuberculosis. The primary endpoint in the Phase III trials is a composite outcome of failure at the end of treatment or relapse after stopping treatment. Such trials are usually both long and expensive. Valid surrogate endpoints measured during or at the end of treatment could dramatically reduce both the time and cost of assessing the effectiveness of new regimens. The objective of this study was to evaluate sputum culture results on solid media during treatment as surrogate endpoints for poor outcome. Data were obtained from twelve randomised controlled trials conducted by the British Medical Research Council in the 1970s and 80s in East Africa and East Asia, consisting of 6974 participants and 49 different treatment regimens. The month two culture result was shown to be a poor surrogate in East Africa but a good surrogate in Hong Kong. In contrast, the month three culture was a good surrogate in trials conducted in East Africa but not in Hong Kong. As well as differences in location, ethnicity and probable strain of Mycobacteria tuberculosis, Hong Kong trials more often evaluated regimens with rifampicin throughout and intermittent regimens, and patients in East African trials more often presented with extensive cavitation and were slower to convert to culture negative during treatment. An endpoint that is a summary measure of the longitudinal profile of culture results over time or that is able to detect the presence of M. tuberculosis later in treatment is more likely to be a better endpoint for a phase II trial than a culture result at a single time point and may prove to be an acceptable surrogate. More data are needed before any endpoint can be used as a surrogate in a confirmatory phase III trial.

Tuberculosis Biomarker and Surrogate Endpoint Research Roadmap

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Institutes of Health convened a multidisciplinary meeting to discuss surrogate markers of treatment response in tuberculosis. The goals were to assess recent surrogate marker research and to provide specific recommendations for (1) the qualification and validation of biomarkers of treatment outcome; (2) the standardization of specimen and data collection for future clinical trials, including a minimum set of samples and collection time points; and (3) the creation ofa specimen repository to support biomarker testing. This article summarizes these recommendations and provides a roadmap for their implementation.

Innovative Trial Designs Are Practical Solutions for Improving the Treatment of Tuberculosis

A growing number of new drugs for the treatment of tuberculosis are in clinical development. Confirmatory phase 3 trials are expensive and time-consuming and the question of whether one particular drug combination can be used to treat tuberculosis is less important from a public health perspective than the question of which are the shortest, simplest, most effective, and safest regimens. While preclinical and phase 1 studies provide some guidance in the selection of combinations for clinical evaluation, a large number of combinations will require phase 2 testing to ensure that only the best regimens advance to phase 3. The multi-arm multi-stage trial design is an example of a treatment selection-adaptive design where multiple experimental arms are each simultaneously compared with a common control and interim analyses allow for poor performing arms to be dropped early. Such designs, if designed and implemented correctly, require fewer patients, can be completed in a shorter time frame, and answer more relevant questions without any loss in statistical validity or scientific integrity. There are, however, practical issues that must be considered in applying this in tuberculosis treatment trials. More innovative trials designs should be considered to speed drug and regimen development for the treatment of tuberculosis.