Irrigation and phosphorous fertilization management to minimize rice grain arsenic content

This research sought to minimize inorganic arsenic levels in polished rice grain by using different irrigation and phosphorous fertilization practices while also maintaining crop yield and water productivity. Two experiments were conducted during seasons 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 using a split-plot design with three blocks, five irrigation treatments (main-plots) and two phosphorous levels (sub-plots). Irrigation treatments consisted of a traditional continuous flood (CF) control and four alternatives irrigation techniques with one or two drying events during the irrigation cycle. The phosphorous fertilization levels investigated were an unfertilized control (0 kg P₂O₅ ha^-1) and the recommended fertilization level of 50 kg P₂O₅ ha^-1. Soil pH and redox potentials were measured in each treatment. Strategically-timed, low severity drying events were effective at achieving aerobic soil conditions, resulting in Eh values over 50 mV. The alternative irrigation treatment with two drying events, implemented at panicle initiation and full flowering, was the most effective in reducing inorganic arsenic in grain without affecting grain yield or the amount of irrigation water applied. This irrigation technique could be considered as an alternative management to the traditional continuous flooded to reach minimal inorganic arsenic accumulation in grain in order to attend special quality standards or specific market requirements. Accumulated inorganic arsenic in grain was below international maximum levels in all analyzed samples, with an average value of 0.084 mg kg^-1.

0481 Impact of Lemborexant on Fatigue Severity in Subjects with Clinically Significant Levels of Fatigue at Baseline

Introduction

In Phase 3 SUNRISE-1 (NCT02783729; E2006-G000-304) and SUNRISE-2 (NCT02952820; E2006-G000-303), lemborexant (LEM) provided significant benefit versus placebo on sleep diary-based sleep onset/maintenance outcomes over 1mo and 6mo, respectively, in subjects with insomnia disorder. The impact of LEM on patient-reported fatigue, assessed using the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), in subjects with clinically significant fatigue (CSF) at baseline was examined for each study.

Methods

SUNRISE-1 was a 1mo, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled, parallel-group study in female (≥55y) and male (≥65y) subjects (n=1006); subjects received placebo, LEM 5mg (LEM5), LEM 10mg (LEM10) or zolpidem tartrate extended-release (not reported here). SUNRISE-2 was a 12mo, randomized, double-blind study in subjects age ≥18y (n=949). Subjects received placebo, LEM5, or LEM10 for 6mo. Placebo subjects were rerandomized to LEM5 or LEM10 for another 6mo; LEM subjects continued assigned treatment. CSF was defined as FSS total score (FSSts) ≥36.

Results

In subjects with baseline CSF, in SUNRISE-1, baseline FSSts was 46.8, 46.5, and 46.6 in placebo (n=117), LEM5 (n=157), and LEM10 (n=153) groups, respectively, and, in SUNRISE-2, was 45.7, 46.4, and 45.8 in placebo (n=169), LEM5 (n=181), and LEM10 (n=173) groups, respectively. At 1mo, mean changes from baseline in FSSts were not significantly different vs placebo for LEM5 in both studies, and for LEM10 in SUNRISE-1. In SUNRISE-2, LEM10 significantly decreased mean [SD] FSSts from baseline vs placebo at 1mo (LEM10, −11.2[13.9] vs placebo, −8.7[10.5]; P=0.03). By 6mo in SUNRISE-2, both LEM5 and LEM10 significantly decreased mean [SD] FSSts from baseline versus placebo (LEM5, −15.4[13.8]; LEM10, −15.0[14.2] vs placebo, −11.2[11.6]; both P<0.05). At 12mo, mean [SD] FSSts improvements were sustained for LEM5 (−20.4[12.8]) and LEM10 (−18.1[14.7]).

Conclusion

In subjects with CSF, longer treatments (>1mo) may be needed to observe significant FSSts improvements, which were evident at 6mo and sustained at 12mo with continuous LEM treatment.

Support

Eisai Inc.

0478 A Multicenter Pilot Study to Evaluate Next-Dose Transition from Zolpidem to Lemborexant for the Treatment of Insomnia

Introduction

Switching of medications for insomnia occurs often in clinical practice based on a variety of reasons. However, few clinical studies have examined methods for transitioning patients between different insomnia medications. This is especially important to consider when the classes of drugs are different (e.g., GABA-ergic agonism vs orexin receptor antagonism); thus, clinical guidance would be valuable. The safety and efficacy of the dual orexin receptor antagonist lemborexant (LEM) for the treatment of insomnia was confirmed in two Phase 3 studies, SUNRISE-1 (NCT02783729, E2006-G000-304) and SUNRISE-2 (NCT02952820, E2006-G000-303). This pilot study (NCT04009577, E2006-A001-312) was designed to assess pre-specified dosing approaches for directly transitioning from the sedative-hypnotic zolpidem (ZOL), a commonly prescribed sleep aid, to LEM.

Methods

This multicenter pilot study has enrolled subjects age ≥18 years with an insomnia diagnosis (DSM-5 criteria), who used ZOL (intermittently or frequently) as their only insomnia treatment. Following a 3-week Screening period, eligible subjects enter the Treatment Phase (2-week titration period: assigned to 1 of 3 treatment arms based on ZOL use during Screening), and then the Extension Phase (maintenance period up to 12 weeks). During both the Treatment and Extension Phases, the dose of LEM is flexible between 5 and 10 mg, depending on efficacy and tolerability. The primary endpoint is to evaluate the proportion of subjects taking ZOL who successfully transition to LEM (lemborexant 5 mg [LEM5] or lemborexant 10 mg [LEM10]) after 2 weeks of LEM treatment.

Results

Enrollment began July 15, 2019. It was initially projected that approximately 110 subjects would be screened to provide about 60 subjects for randomization across 3 treatment arms. Interim data will be presented (planned cutoff date Jan 08, 2020).

Conclusion

This pilot study will help inform on dosing guidance when transitioning a patient from a GABA-ergic drug to an orexin receptor antagonist.

Support

Eisai Inc.

0477 Characteristics of Insomnia Subjects Screened for Transitioning from Zolpidem Tartrate to Lemborexant in a Multicenter Pilot Study

Introduction

Patients who take insomnia medication may change medications for reasons including lack of efficacy, adverse events, and dependence concerns. A pilot study (NCT04009577, E2006-A001-312) assessed a dosing approach for transitioning patients from zolpidem tartrate (ZOL; immediate or extended-release) to lemborexant, a dual orexin receptor antagonist. Here we describe characteristics of subjects who entered the study Screening Period and their reasons for wanting to change medications.

Methods

This multicenter pilot study was conducted in the U.S. and enrolled subjects age ≥18y with insomnia diagnosed per DSM-5 criteria, and who used ZOL (self-reported intermittently [3-4 nights/week] or frequently [≥5 nights/week]) as their only insomnia treatment. Subjects entered a 3-week Screening Period, during which frequency/dose of ZOL taken was recorded; subjects also wore an actigraph continuously. Eligible subjects thereafter entered the Treatment Phase to determine lemborexant dosing (5 or 10mg during a 2-week Titration Period with assignment to 1 of 3 treatment schedules based on ZOL usage frequency during Screening), followed by a 12-week Extension (Maintenance) Phase and a 4-week Follow-up Period.

Results

Forty-nine subjects entered the Screening period and completed the Chief Complaint Form through November 2019; mean(SD) age was 57.1(13.8)y, 67.3% were female, 69.4% were white, and 28.6% were black. 31 subjects reported using ZOL frequently and 15 reported using ZOL intermittently (3 missing). The most common sleep complaint was waking up too early (n=33), followed by difficulty staying asleep (n=13), and difficulty falling asleep (n=3). Reasons for wanting to switch from ZOL included: ZOL not working (n=19), concerns about taking ZOL (n=14), wanting to try something new/potentially better (n=6), side effects (n=5), and residual daytime sleepiness (n=4). 43/49 subjects completed screening through this period.

Conclusion

This study offers the opportunity to understand patients’ current use of insomnia medication and their motivation for wanting to change insomnia medications.

Support

Eisai Inc.

0484 How Much Improvement in Subject-Reported Sleep Onset Latency is Needed for Patients to Report a Positive Impact of Their Insomnia Medication?

Introduction

How much improvement would be considered meaningful from the patient perspective is not well defined. In SUNRISE-2 (NCT02952820; E2006-G000-303), using the Patient Global Impression-Insomnia version (PGI-I), subjects rated how treatment impacted subjective (sleep diary-based) sleep onset latency (sSOL; Question2; positive, neutral, and negative) relative to before starting treatment. Meaningful change can thus be determined based on the change from baseline (CFB) in subjects with a positive score.

Methods

SUNRISE-2 (n=949, full analysis set) was a Phase 3, 12-month, double-blind, global study in subjects age ≥18y with insomnia disorder. Subjects received PBO (N=318), LEM 5mg (LEM5, N=316) or LEM 10mg (LEM10, N=315) for 6 months. At the end of Month 6, PBO subjects were rerandomized to LEM5 or LEM10; LEM5 and LEM10 subjects continued at the same dose for 6 more months. The ranges of median CFB in sSOL (minutes) at 6 months were examined in response to PGI-I Item 2.

Results

At 6 months, subjects reporting positive medication effect (PBO, n=110; LEM5, n=178; LEM10, n=159) showed median CFB in sSOL from -17.5 to -32.1 minutes across treatment groups. In subjects reporting neutral effect (PBO, n=49; LEM5, n=28; LEM10, n=27), median CFB in sSOL ranged from -10.4 to -25.6 minutes across treatment groups. In subjects reporting negative medication effect (PBO, n=82; LEM5, n=34; LEM10, n=32), median CFB in sSOL ranged from -8.6 to -10.4 minutes across treatment groups. The PBO group provided the smallest numbers for each response category range.

Conclusion

Subjects reporting positive medication effect on PGI-I Item 2, i.e. decreased time to fall asleep, had corresponding changes from baseline in sSOL ranging from -17.5 to -32.1 minutes. Thus, this range may represent a clinically meaningful improvement as perceived by patient-subjects, and may be useful to clinicians in determining whether a treatment regimen is working for their patients.

Support

Eisai Inc.

0486 Impact of Intrinsic Factors on Efficacy of Lemborexant: Subgroup Analyses of SUNRISE-2

Introduction

Lemborexant (LEM), a dual orexin receptor antagonist, demonstrated significant benefits vs placebo on patient-reported sleep outcomes in adults age ≥18y in SUNRISE-2 (NCT02952820; E2006-G000-303). The impact of intrinsic factors (sex, race, and region) on LEM efficacy outcomes was assessed.

Methods

SUNRISE-2 was a randomized, double-blind, global phase 3 study in adults age ≥18y with insomnia disorder (Full Analysis Set, n=949). Subjects received placebo (n=318) or LEM (5mg [LEM5], n=316; 10mg [LEM10]; n=315) for 6 months. At 6 months, placebo subjects were rerandomized to LEM for another 6 months (not reported here); LEM subjects remained on their assigned dose. Sleep diary-based (subjective) sleep onset latency (sSOL) and wake after sleep onset (sWASO) were assessed for prespecified patient subgroups including: sex (male [n=302], female [n=647]), race (white [n=679], black [n=76], Asian [n=178]), and region (North America [n=302], Europe/New Zealand [n=483], Asia [n=164]). Analyses were not controlled for multiplicity.

Results

LEM5 and LEM10 provided numerically greater median reductions (improvement) from baseline in sSOL vs placebo at 6 months in across all subgroups examined. Also, LEM5 and LEM10 led to mean reductions (improvement) from baseline at 6 months in sWASO for all subgroups. While several subgroups had small numbers of subjects, changes from baseline in sSOL and sWASO were in the direction of improvement in the majority of subgroups. Pharmacokinetic analyses showed no important differences in exposure by these factors.

Conclusion

LEM treatment demonstrated efficacy in improving sSOL and sWASO across patient subgroups, supporting common dosing instructions for both sexes and all races.

Support

Eisai Inc.

0474 Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Lemborexant in Elderly Adults with Insomnia Disorder: Results from SUNRISE-2

Introduction

In SUNRISE-2 (NCT02952820; E2006-G000-303), the dual orexin receptor antagonist lemborexant (LEM) demonstrated significant benefit versus placebo (PBO) on subjective sleep endpoints over 6mo in subjects age ≥18y; benefits were sustained over 12mo. Here we present 12mo efficacy and safety data for LEM from the elderly (≥65y) subgroup.

Methods

SUNRISE-2 was a 12mo, randomized, double-blind, PBO-controlled (first 6mo [Period 1]), global phase 3 study. During Period 1, subjects were randomized to PBO or LEM (5mg, [LEM5]; 10mg, [LEM10]). During Period 2 (second 6mo), LEM subjects continued their assigned dose while PBO subjects were rerandomized to LEM5 or LEM10 (not reported here). Patient-reported (subjective) sleep endpoints were assessed from sleep diary data (sleep onset latency [sSOL]; sleep efficiency [sSE]; wake after sleep onset [sWASO]).

Results

Of the 949 subjects in the Full Analysis Set, 262 were age ≥65y. At 6mo, in subjects ≥65y, median sSOL significantly decreased from baseline for LEM5 (−21.7) and LEM10 (−26.0) versus PBO (−10.8; P<0.0001, P<0.01, respectively). At 12mo, LEM5 and LEM10 subjects maintained decreases in median sSOL (−29.3, −34.3, respectively). At 6mo, the mean (SD) increase from baseline in sSE was significantly larger versus PBO (8.5[13.3]) for LEM5 (16.9[13.6]; P<0.001) and LEM10 (14.9[15.9]; P<0.01). At 12mo, mean (SD) increase in sSE was maintained for LEM5 (18.1[12.5]) and LEM10 (18.0[16.8]). At 6mo, mean (SD) change from baseline in sWASO was significantly decreased versus PBO (−26.5 [52.9]) for LEM5 and LEM10 (−54.8[64.4], P<0.01; −51.4[69.3], P<0.05, respectively). At 12mo, mean (SD) decrease in sWASO was maintained for LEM5 (−58.6[46.0]) and LEM10 (−60.9[80.4]). Over 12mo, the most common (>10% either group) treatment emergent adverse events with LEM5 and LEM10, respectively, were somnolence (9.3%, 19.0%), nasopharyngitis (9.3%, 10.7%), and headache (10.5%, 6.0%).

Conclusion

In elderly subjects, LEM demonstrated efficacy at 6mo, which persisted at 12mo; LEM was well tolerated.

Support

Eisai Inc.

0473 Effectiveness and Safety of Lemborexant in Subjects Previously Treated with Placebo for 6 Months in SUNRISE-2

Introduction

In SUNRISE-2 (NCT02952820; E2006-G000-303), while lemborexant (LEM) provided significant benefit versus placebo (PBO) on sleep-diary measurements over 6mo, some improvement was noted in PBO subjects. We report outcomes from PBO subjects rerandomized to LEM during the last 6mo of SUNRISE-2.

Methods

SUNRISE-2 was a randomized, double-blind, global phase 3 study in adults (≥18y) with insomnia disorder. Subjects received PBO or LEM (5mg [LEM5]; 10mg [LEM10]) for 6mo. PBO subjects were rerandomized to LEM for another 6mo; LEM subjects continued assigned treatment. Changes from 6mo baseline (calculated after PBO completion) in subjective sleep onset latency (sSOL), subjective sleep efficiency (sSE), and subjective wake after sleep onset (sWASO) are reported for rerandomized subjects.

Results

At study baseline for PBO subjects (n=318), median sSOL (min) was 55.9, mean (SD) sSE (%) and sWASO (min) were 61.3 (17.8) and 132.5 (80.2), respectively. The 6mo baseline values for rerandomized PBO-LEM5 (n=133) and PBO-LEM10 (n=125) subjects, respectively, were: median sSOL, 31.2, 34.3; mean (SD) sSE, 70.5 (20.2), 71.1 (18.0); mean (SD) sWASO, 105.1 (80.6), 100.1 (84.6). Median sSOL decreased from the 6mo baseline after 1mo (PBO-LEM5, −3.2; PBO-LEM10, −2.9) and 6mo (PBO-LEM5, −2.7; PBO-LEM10, −5.0). Mean (SD) sSE increased from the 6mo baseline after 1mo (PBO-LEM5, 3.9 [12.1]; PBO-LEM10, 3.5 [8.1]) and 6mo (PBO-LEM5, 3.9 [13.6]; PBO-LEM10, 4.5 [13.0]). Mean (SD) sWASO decreased after 1mo (PBO-LEM5, −8.5 [49.4]; PBO-LEM10, −5.7 [36.1]) and 6mo (PBO-LEM5, −8.2 [49.0]; PBO-LEM10, −10.0 [58.8]). Treatment-emergent adverse events incidence was similar during PBO (62.7%) and LEM treatment (PBO-LEM5, 54.9%; PBO-LEM10, 57.7%). Adverse events were consistent with those seen in the initial 6mo of treatment for patients originally randomized to LEM.

Conclusion

Rerandomization to LEM was associated with additional improvement in sleep outcomes following the PBO-related response. LEM benefit was evident after 1mo and was sustained throughout treatment. LEM was well tolerated.

Support

Eisai Inc.

Effect of lorcaserin on weight reduction in persons with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA): a combined subgroup analysis from three randomized, controlled clinical trials

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To evaluate weight loss with lorcaserin in persons with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA).

METHODS

This retrospective analysis evaluated weight loss of lorcaserin (10 mg twice daily) versus placebo in persons with obesity or overweight persons with OSA from a pooled database of three randomized, controlled trials. Primary end points were reductions in the baseline body weight of ≥5% and ≥10% at year 1 and overall weight change at year 1. Changes in heart rate and blood pressure were also evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 336 persons with OSA were identified in the overall pooled population (N = 6,636). At year 1, more patients receiving lorcaserin lost ≥5% (47.2% lorcaserin vs. 25.6% placebo; p < 0.0001) and 10% (22.2% lorcaserin vs. 13.1% placebo; p < 0.0354) of their baseline body weight. Weight loss at year 1 was 6.4 kg versus 3.5 kg in the lorcaserin and placebo groups, respectively (p < 0.0001). Similar results were observed for change in blood pressure and heart rate, with responders having larger benefits. Weight loss was similar between persons with and without OSA.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective analysis, persons with OSA showed significant and meaningful weight loss, blood pressure and heart rate reductions in patients treated with lorcaserin versus placebo. Persons with OSA lost just as much weight as those without OSA. Health care providers can expect persons with OSA to lose weight by diet, exercise and the weight loss medication lorcaserin comparable with persons without OSA. Further prospective research is warranted to evaluate impact of weight loss on OSA and overall outcomes for patients.

Effect of lorcaserin in different age groups: a post hoc analysis of patients from the BLOOM, BLOSSOM and BLOOM-DM studies

INTRODUCTION

The elderly population is projected to be the fastest growing group of individuals with obesity group in the United States. As such, there is merit in examining factors that contribute to healthy aging and weight management. The effects of newer weight loss medications approved after 2013 have been studied but are not often assessed specifically in older persons.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis evaluated the magnitude of weight loss in adults across age quartiles with lorcaserin, a serotonin (5-HT) 2C receptor agonist indicated as an adjunct to a reduced-caloric diet and increased physical activity for chronic weight management. Data from three lorcaserin pivotal phase 3 studies were used in this analysis. Data for patients with overweight/obesity without type 2 diabetes (T2D; BLOOM/BLOSSOM; body mass index [BMI] 27.0-29.9 kg/m2 and ≥1 comorbidity or BMI 30.0-45.0 kg/m2) and patients with overweight/obesity with T2D (BLOOM-DM; BMI 27.0-45.0 kg/m2) were used. Patients were randomized to receive lorcaserin 10 mg twice daily or placebo in addition to diet and exercise for 52 weeks. Age quartiles between the studies differed as the T2D population was on average, 9 years older.

RESULTS

This analysis shows that lorcaserin was associated with improved weight loss relative to placebo regardless of age. Importantly, these results were consistent for patients with and without T2D. Interestingly, the magnitude of weight loss for lorcaserin appeared to increase with increasing age. In patients without T2D, odds of achieving ≥5% and ≥10% reduction in body weight at 52 weeks were significantly higher for patients >36 years. Lorcaserin was well tolerated in all patients across all quartiles including the oldest quartile.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, this post hoc analysis demonstrates that lorcaserin treatment in patients with and without T2D was safe and effective at reducing weight across all age groups analysed. Weight loss appeared to be greater for older patients; additional analyses are warranted to confirm these findings and to better understand the factors for improved weight loss.

Lorcaserin and metabolic disease: weight-loss dependent and independent effects

OBJECTIVE

Weight management pharmacotherapies can improve metabolic diseases through weight-dependent and weight-independent effects. Lorcaserin is a selective 5-hydroxytryptamine 2C receptor agonist. The objective of this analysis is to quantify the relative contribution of weight loss to the treatment effects of lorcaserin 10 mg twice a day on key metabolic parameters.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis evaluated 6,897 patients with overweight or obesity (with or without diabetes mellitus) across three randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 52-week clinical trials that evaluated lorcaserin 10 mg twice daily (BID; NCT00395135, NCT00603902, and NCT00603291); 509 patients from only one of the studies had type 2 diabetes mellitus. A mediation analysis was applied to help rank the relative contribution of weight loss to metabolic study outcomes.

RESULTS

According to this mediation analysis, lorcaserin 10 mg BID improved a spectrum of adiposopathic metabolic abnormalities with varying contributions attributable to weight loss. Improvements in waist circumference and blood pressure were almost exclusively attributable to weight loss. Less than 50% of the improvement in glucose parameters (fasting blood glucose and haemoglobin A1c) were attributable to weight loss.

CONCLUSIONS

Across Phase III clinical trials, lorcaserin 10 mg BID improved multiple cardiometabolic parameters through both weight-loss dependent and independent mechanisms.

Effects of lorcaserin on fat and lean mass loss in obese and overweight patients without and with type 2 diabetes mellitus: the BLOSSOM and BLOOM-DM studies

Body composition was determined using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in a subset of patients without (BLOSSOM) and with (BLOOM-DM) type 2 diabetes who received diet and exercise counselling along with either lorcaserin 10 mg twice daily or placebo. DXA scans were performed on study day 1 (baseline), week 24 and week 52. Baseline demographics of the subpopulations (without diabetes, n = 189; with diabetes, n = 63) were similar between studies and representative of their study populations. At week 52, patients without diabetes on lorcaserin lost significantly more fat mass relative to those on placebo (-12.06% vs -5.93%; p = 0.008). In patients with diabetes, fat mass was also decreased with lorcaserin relative to placebo (-9.87% vs -1.65%; p < 0.05). More fat mass was lost in the trunk region with lorcaserin compared with placebo (without diabetes: -3.31% vs -2.05%; with diabetes: -3.65% vs -0.36%). Weight loss with lorcaserin was associated with a greater degree of fat mass loss than lean mass loss, and most of the fat mass lost for patients without and with diabetes was from the central region of the body.

Adjunctive rufinamide in Lennox-Gastaut syndrome: a long-term, open-label extension study

OBJECTIVE

This open-label extension evaluated the long-term efficacy and tolerability of rufinamide in patients with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS) who had previously completed a 12-week double-blind study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In total, 124 patients (aged 4-37 years), receiving 1-3 concomitant antiepileptic drugs, were treated with rufinamide approximately 25-60 mg/kg/day. Efficacy was assessed by seizure frequency; tolerability by adverse events (AEs) and laboratory tests.

RESULTS

Overall, patients were treated with rufinamide for a median (range) of 432 (10-1149) days. Reductions in seizure frequency were observed throughout the study; during the last 12 months of treatment, 41.0% and 47.9% of patients had > or = 50% reduction in total and tonic-atonic seizure frequency, respectively. The most common AEs were vomiting (30.6%) and pyrexia (25.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

In this open-label extension, rufinamide appeared to be an effective long-term adjunctive therapy for the treatment of LGS-associated seizures in children and young adults.

Efficacy and safety of donepezil over 3 years: an open-label, multicentre study in patients with Alzheimer's disease

OBJECTIVE

This 132-week, open-label extension study assessed the long-term efficacy and safety of donepezil in 579 patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD) who had previously participated in a 24-week double-blind study of 5 or 10 mg/day donepezil vs placebo.

METHOD

Patients enrolled in the present study had a 6-week single-blind placebo washout period followed by treatment with donepezil 5 mg/day for 6 weeks with an optional increase in dosage to 10 mg/day between weeks 6 and 32.

RESULTS

After 6 weeks of open-label treatment with donepezil 5 mg/day, mean Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale -- cognitive subscale scores (ADAS-cog) improved by approximately two points, while after 12 weeks of open-label treatment (with a majority of patients receiving 10 mg/day), the mean ADAS-cog score was 1 point better than the score at the end of the placebo washout period. Scores then declined gradually over the remainder of the study. Mean changes in Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes scores showed slight improvement over the first 12 weeks of open-label treatment and then slowly declined for the remainder of the study period. Donepezil was well tolerated over the entire 162-week study period. Overall, 85% of patients experienced at least one adverse event (AE). The most common included diarrhoea (12%), nausea (11%), infection (11%) and accidental injury (10%). Some patients discontinued the study due to AEs (15%).

CONCLUSIONS

These results support the conclusion that donepezil is safe and effective for the long-term treatment of patients with mild to moderate AD.

Long-term prevention of erosive or ulcerative gastro-oesophageal reflux disease relapse with rabeprazole 10 or 20 mg vs. placebo: results of a 5-year study in the United States

BACKGROUND

Erosive gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a chronic condition requiring long-term maintenance treatment. However, few trials of proton pump inhibitors in maintaining healing of erosive or ulcerative GERD are conducted for longer than 1 year.

AIM

To compare the efficacy and safety of 10- and 20-mg rabeprazole with placebo in the 5-year maintenance of healing in patients previously diagnosed with erosive/ulcerative GERD healed in an acute efficacy trial.

METHODS

Patients (N = 497) were randomized to receive once-daily doses of 10- or 20-mg rabeprazole or placebo. The primary efficacy measure was endoscopically documented absence of oesophageal erosions or ulcerations.

RESULTS

After 5 years, relapse rates in both rabeprazole groups were significantly lower than with placebo (rabeprazole 20 mg, 11%; 10 mg, 23%; placebo, 63%; P < 0.001 for rabeprazole vs. placebo; P = 0.005 for rabeprazole 20 mg vs. 10 mg). Both rabeprazole doses were significantly superior to placebo in preventing relapse of heartburn frequency and improving patient quality of life. Analyses of adverse events, biopsy findings and laboratory values showed no evidence of clinically significant effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Five-year maintenance therapy with rabeprazole is effective in preventing relapse of erosive or ulcerative GERD and is well tolerated.

Integrated acidity and rabeprazole pharmacology

BACKGROUND

Integrated gastric and oesophageal acidity can be calculated from measurements of gastric and oesophageal pH and used to quantify gastric and oesophageal acidity over time. Rabeprazole is a new proton pump inhibitor that is effective in treating gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

AIM

To use measurement of integrated gastric and oesophageal acidity to determine the onset, duration and overall effect of rabeprazole in subjects with GERD.

METHODS

Subjects with GERD were required to have oesophageal pH less-than-or-equal 4 for at least 10% of a 24-h recording. Effects of 20 mg rabeprazole on 24-h gastric and oesophageal pH were measured on days 1 and 7 of dosing. Integrated gastric and oesophageal acidity were calculated from time-weighted average hydrogen ion concentrations at each second of the 24-h record.

RESULTS

At steady-state, 20 mg rabeprazole inhibited gastric acidity by 89% and oesophageal acidity by 95%. The first dose of rabeprazole inhibited gastric and oesophageal acidity by at least 70% of the steady-state effect. Oesophageal acidity could be divided into monophasic and biphasic patterns, and rabeprazole had different effects on oesophageal and gastric acidity in these two GERD subpopulations. The onset of action of the first dose of rabeprazole on gastric acidity was 4 h and on oesophageal acidity was 4 h in monophasic subjects and 7 h in biphasic subjects. Integrated acidity was more sensitive than time pH less-than-or-equal 4 in measuring the inhibitory actions of rabeprazole.

CONCLUSIONS

Integrated gastric and oesophageal acidity are quantitative measurements that provide useful and novel information regarding the pathophysiology of GERD as well as the impact of antisecretory agents such as rabeprazole.

Efficacy of rabeprazole once daily for acid-related disorders

Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) have revolutionized the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and peptic ulcer. To evaluate the efficacy of the new PPI rabeprazole, 12 controlled clinical trials were conducted worldwide-three for each indication (erosive or ulcerative GERD healing, long-term GERD healing maintenance, duodenal ulcer healing, and gastric ulcer healing). Rabeprazole was compared to placebo, the H2-receptor antagonist ranitidine, and the PPI omeprazole. Treatment duration ranged from < or =4 weeks for duodenal ulcer to < or =6 weeks for gastric ulcer, < or =8 weeks for GERD healing, and 1 year for maintenance of GERD healing. Rabeprazole was as effective as omeprazole for each indication and significantly more effective than ranitidine for healing of GERD (87% vs 66%) and duodenal ulcer (83% vs 73%). Rabeprazole was also superior to ranitidine in providing symptom relief, particularly in GERD.

Rabeprazole for the prevention of pathologic and symptomatic relapse of erosive or ulcerative gastroesophageal reflux disease. Rebeprazole Study Group

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the effectiveness and safety profile of 10 and 20 mg of rabeprazole, a new proton pump inhibitor, once daily versus placebo in preventing endoscopic and symptomatic relapse for up to 1 yr among patients with healed erosive or ulcerative gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

METHODS

The 52-wk trial used a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group design in which 209 men and women were assigned to 10 or 20 mg of rabeprazole once daily in the morning or placebo.

RESULTS

Both rabeprazole doses were significantly superior to placebo in preventing endoscopic relapse (p < 0.001), and 20 mg was significantly more effective than 10 mg (p < 0.04). Both doses were also significantly superior to placebo in reducing the frequency and severity of heartburn relapse (p < 0.001). When adjusted for differences in exposure to study medication, no significant differences were found in the incidence of adverse events. No clinically significant changes were found regarding clinical laboratory parameters, vital signs, electrocardiograms, ophthalmological evaluations, body weight, serum gastrin, and enterochromaffin-like cell histology.

CONCLUSIONS

Once-daily therapy with 10 or 20 mg of rabeprazole effectively prevents pathological and symptomatic GERD relapse. The 20-mg dose is significantly more effective than the 10-mg dose in preventing endoscopic recurrence. Treatment was well tolerated, and no clinically significant safety findings emerged. Our findings support rabeprazole's efficacy in preventing GERD recurrence with excellent tolerability and a short-term favorable safety profile.

Rabeprazole for the prevention of recurrent erosive or ulcerative gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Rabeprazole Study Group

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of rabeprazole 10 mg and 20 mg versus placebo for the prevention of endoscopically demonstrable relapse in patients previously diagnosed with erosive or ulcerative gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) who had no oesophageal erosions or ulcerations at study entry. The study also assessed the effectiveness of rabeprazole in preventing GORD symptom recurrence and reductions in quality of life.

DESIGN/METHODS

The trial used a multicentre, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group design and enrolled 288 male and female outpatients of > or =18 years of age. Patients were assigned to treatment with either rabeprazole 10 mg or 20 mg once daily in the morning (QAM) or placebo and followed for 52 weeks.

RESULTS

Both rabeprazole doses were significantly more effective than placebo in preventing endoscopically demonstrable GORD relapse (P<0.001 versus placebo). The cumulative relapse rate for rabeprazole 10 mg at week 52 was 23%; for rabeprazole 20 mg, 14%; and for placebo, 71%. Both rabeprazole doses were also significantly superior to placebo in preventing relapse of heartburn frequency (P<0.001 for all comparisons between rabeprazole and placebo), with no significant differences between the two doses. Rabeprazole was also significantly more effective than placebo in preventing relapse of day-and night-time heartburn severity, maintaining overall patient well-being, and reducing antacid use. Both rabeprazole doses were well tolerated; most treatment-emergent adverse events were mild or moderate. There were no clinically significant changes in clinical laboratory values, thyroid function tests, vital signs, or electrocardiograms.

CONCLUSION

Once-daily treatment with rabeprazole 10 mg or 20 mg is effective and well tolerated in preventing relapse of erosive or ulcerative GORD and associated symptoms and maintaining quality of life.

The benefit/risk profile of rabeprazole, a new proton-pump inhibitor

Acid-related diseases such as gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) and peptic ulcer are a common cause of morbidity and if inadequately treated can lead to serious complications. The proton-pump inhibitor rabeprazole has been extensively evaluated in well-controlled trials in North America and Europe for the acute treatment of erosive or ulcerative GORD and gastric and duodenal ulcers and for the long-term maintenance of GORD healing. The results show that rabeprazole has a favourable benefit/risk profile for each indication. Rabeprazole 10 and 20 mg given once daily in the morning was highly effective in producing and maintaining healing, providing symptom relief, and improving overall well-being. Healing rates for rabeprazole were equivalent to omeprazole in all indications, and superior (GORD healing and duodenal ulcer healing) or equivalent (gastric ulcer healing) to the histamine 2-receptor antagonist ranitidine. Symptom relief provided by rabeprazole was equivalent or superior to comparator drugs. Rabeprazole was well tolerated in both short- and long-term studies. The incidence of treatment-emergent signs and symptoms related to rabeprazole was low, and these were generally mild or moderate in severity. The overall rate of discontinuations due to adverse events was approximately 3%. There were no deaths related to rabeprazole therapy. These findings indicate a favourable benefit/risk profile for each intended use.