BackgroundClinical analgesic trials typically report response as group mean results. However, research has shown that few patients are average and most have responses at the extremes. Moreover, group mean results do not convey response levels and thus have limited value in representing the benefit-risk at an individual level. Responder analyses and numbers-needed-to-treat (NNT) are considered more relevant for evaluating treatment response. We evaluated levels of analgesic response and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) score improvement and the associated NNTs.MethodsThis was a post-hoc analysis of a 6-week, randomized, double-blind study (N = 387) comparing etoricoxib 90 mg, etoricoxib 120 mg, naproxen 1000 mg, and placebo in AS. Spine pain and BASDAI were measured on a 100-mm visual analog scale. The number and percentage of patients achieving ≥30% and ≥50% improvement in both BASDAI and spine pain were calculated and used to determine the corresponding NNTs. Patients who discontinued from the study for any reason were assigned zero improvement beyond 7 days of the time of discontinuation.ResultsFor etoricoxib 90 mg, etoricoxib 120 mg and naproxen 1000 mg, the NNTs at 6 weeks compared with placebo were 2.0, 2.0, and 2.7 respectively for BASDAI ≥30% improvement, and 3.2, 2.8, and 4.1 for ≥50% improvement. For spine pain, the NNTs were 1.9, 2.0, and 3.2, respectively, for ≥30% improvement, and 2.7, 2.5, and 3.7 for ≥50% improvement. The differences between etoricoxib and naproxen exceeded the limit of ±0.5 units described as a clinically meaningful difference for pain. Response rates and NNTs were generally similar and stable over 2, 4, and 6 weeks.ConclusionsFor every 2 patients treated with etoricoxib, 1 achieved a clinically meaningful (≥30%) improvement in spine pain and BASDAI beyond that expected from placebo, whereas the corresponding values were approximately 1 in every 3 patients treated with naproxen. Use of NNTs and responder analyses provide additional, complementary information beyond population mean responses when assessing efficacy compared to placebo and amongst active therapies.
The overwhelming majority of the patients who responded to treatment by 2 weeks remained responders at 12 weeks, with response status largely established within 2 weeks of treatment initiation. Early identification of NSAID response or non-response may allow clinicians to better and more rapidly adjust symptomatic OA management.
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with neutrophil-mediated inflammation, a potential target for treatment in COPD. We evaluated MK-0633, a 5-lipoxygenase inhibitor in patients with COPD. This was a 12 week, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study comparing MK-0633 100 mg and placebo in patients 40-75 years of age (N = 266) with COPD, post-β-agonist forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) 25%-75% predicted, and an FEV(1)/forced vital capacity ratio (FVC) ≤ 70%. Long-acting inhaled bronchodilators were permitted for approximately 50% of patients. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline in pre-dose (trough) FEV(1) measured over the last 2 weeks of the 12 week treatment period. The change in FEV(1) over the last 2 weeks of the 12 weeks treatment period compared to baseline was 0.015 L for MK-0633 and 0.0002 for placebo (p = 0.556). For COPD Global Evaluation, 75.4% of patients receiving MK-0633 reported feeling better vs. 59.8% of patients receiving placebo (p = 0.032). There were no other significant differences between treatments. MK-0633 was well-tolerated and comparable to placebo. The 5-LO inhibitor MK-0633 was not significantly more effective than placebo in improving FEV(1) from baseline in patients with COPD, although more patients reported feeling improved with MK-0633. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00418613.
There is growing concern that rape victims are not provided with emergency contraceptives in many hospital emergency rooms, particularly in Catholic hospitals. In a small pilot study, we examined policies and practices relating to providing information, prescriptions, and pregnancy prophylaxis in emergency rooms. We held structured telephone interviews with emergency department personnel in 58 large urban hospitals, including 28 Catholic hospitals, from across the United States. Our results showed that some Catholic hospitals have policies that prohibit the discussion of emergency contraceptives with rape victims, and in some of these hospitals, a victim would learn about the treatment only by asking. Such policies and practices are contrary to Catholic teaching. More seriously, they undermine a victim's right to information about her treatment options and jeopardize physicians' fiduciary responsibility to act in their patients' best interests. We suggest that institutions must reevaluate their restrictive policies. If they fail to do so, we believe that state legislation requiring hospitals to meet the standard of care for treatment of rape victims is appropriate.
IntroductionRecent publications have described drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) with topiramate. Topiramate has been associated with other severe cutaneous adverse reactions, including Stevens-Johnson syndrome, but a relationship to DRESS has not been established. To determine if there is a causal association between topiramate and DRESS, we conducted a comprehensive review of the data in the Janssen Research & Development Global Safety Database (GSD), signaling databases, and the literature. MethodsThe primary data were post-marketing reports of DRESS in the Janssen topiramate GSD (cumulative through 1 July 2022), representing >14,000,000 patient-years (PY) exposure. Cases were reviewed, assigned a Registry of Severe Cutaneous Adverse Reaction (RegiSCAR) score, and assessed for overall contribution of topiramate to DRESS based on temporality, concomitant medications, dechallenge/rechallenge, and baseline patient factors. Statistical disproportionality was evaluated in European Medicines Agency's EudraVigilance (EV) safety database and the United States Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). For EV, the overall disproportionality threshold was the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the reporting odds ratio (ROR025) >1 and N ≥5. The overall threshold for FAERS was the Empirical Bayesian Geometric Mean (EBGM) ≥2, lower bound of the 90% CI (EB05) of >1, and N ≥3. To account for the role of concomitant drugs, Empirical Bayes regression-adjusted arithmetic mean (ERAM) scores were calculated, with a threshold ≥2, a lower bound of the 90% CI (ER05) of >1, and N ≥3. An integrated search of major biomedical literature was performed for reports of topiramate and DRESS. ResultsThere were 17 reports of DRESS in the GSD (reporting rate 0.12/100,000 PY). RegiSCAR scores ranged from -3 to 7 (average -0.4). No cases met full diagnostic criteria and were highly confounded by the presence of other suspect drugs. Disproportionality scores exceeded thresholds for statistical significance in FAERS (N=72, EBGM=2.06, EB05=1.69), but not in EV (N=33, ROR025=0.79). When accounting for co-administered drugs, ERAM was statistically significant for carbamazepine (4.53), lamotrigine (ERAM=6.54), phenytoin (ERAM=2.91), and zonisamide (ERAM=2.25) exceeding disproportionality thresholds, but the score of topiramate was no longer significant (0.25). ConclusionA comprehensive review of all available evidence does not support a causal association between topiramate and DRESS.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.