BACKGROUNDData are limited regarding the use of poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, such as veliparib, in combination with chemotherapy followed by maintenance as initial treatment in patients with high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma. METHODSIn an international, phase 3, placebo-controlled trial, we assessed the efficacy of veliparib added to first-line induction chemotherapy with carboplatin and paclitaxel and continued as maintenance monotherapy in patients with previously untreated stage III or IV high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive chemotherapy plus placebo followed by placebo maintenance (control), chemotherapy plus veliparib followed by placebo maintenance (veliparib combination only), or chemotherapy plus veliparib followed by veliparib maintenance (veliparib throughout). Cytoreductive surgery could be performed before initiation or after 3 cycles of trial treatment. Combination chemotherapy was 6 cycles, and maintenance therapy was 30 additional cycles. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the veliparib-throughout group as compared with the control group, analyzed sequentially in the BRCA-mutation cohort, the cohort with homologous-recombination deficiency (HRD) (which included the BRCA-mutation cohort), and the intention-to-treat population. RESULTSA total of 1140 patients underwent randomization. In the BRCA-mutation cohort, the median progression-free survival was 34.7 months in the veliparib-throughout group and 22.0 months in the control group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28 to 0.68; P<0.001); in the HRD cohort, it was 31.9 months and 20.5 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.57; 95 CI, 0.43 to 0.76; P<0.001); and in the intention-to-treat population, it was 23.5 months and 17.3 months (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.83; P<0.001). Veliparib led to a higher incidence of anemia and thrombocytopenia when combined with chemotherapy as well as of nausea and fatigue overall. CONCLUSIONSAcross all trial populations, a regimen of carboplatin, paclitaxel, and veliparib induction therapy followed by veliparib maintenance therapy led to significantly longer progression-free survival than carboplatin plus paclitaxel induction therapy alone. The independent value of adding veliparib during induction therapy without veliparib maintenance was less clear.

No abstract

OBJECTIVETo evaluate the efficacy and long-term safety of linagliptin added to basal insulins in type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on basal insulin with or without oral agents.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSA total of 1,261 patients (HbA1c ≥7.0% [53 mmol/mol] to ≤10.0% [86 mmol/mol]) on basal insulin alone or combined with metformin and/or pioglitazone were randomized (1:1) to double-blind treatment with linagliptin 5 mg once daily or placebo for ≥52 weeks. The basal insulin dose was kept unchanged for 24 weeks but could thereafter be titrated according to fasting plasma glucose levels at the investigators’ discretion. The primary end point was the mean change in HbA1c from baseline to week 24. The safety analysis incorporated data up to a maximum of 110 weeks.RESULTSAt week 24, HbA1c changed from a baseline of 8.3% (67 mmol/mol) by −0.6% (−6.6 mmol/mol) and by 0.1% (1.1 mmol/mol) with linagliptin and placebo, respectively (treatment difference −0.65% [95% CI −0.74 to −0.55] [−7.1 mmol/mol]; P < 0.0001). Despite the option to uptitrate basal insulin, it was adjusted only slightly upward (week 52, linagliptin 2.6 IU/day, placebo 4.2 IU/day; P < 0.003), resulting in no further HbA1c improvements. Frequencies of hypoglycemia (week 24, linagliptin 22.0%, placebo 23.2%; treatment end, linagliptin 31.4%, placebo 32.9%) and adverse events (linagliptin 78.4%, placebo 81.4%) were similar between groups. Mean body weight remained unchanged (week 52, linagliptin −0.30 kg, placebo −0.04 kg).CONCLUSIONSLinagliptin added to basal insulin therapy significantly improved glycemic control relative to placebo without increasing hypoglycemia or body weight.

Background Airway inflammation, mediated in part by LTB4, contributes to lung destruction in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). LTB4-receptor inhibition may reduce airway inflammation. We report the results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the efficacy and safety of the leukotriene B4 (LTB4)-receptor antagonist BIIL 284 BS in CF patients. Methods CF patients age ≥ 6 years with mild to moderate lung disease were randomized to oral BIIL 284 BS or placebo once daily for 24 weeks. Co-primary endpoints were change in FEV1 and incidence of pulmonary exacerbation. Results After 420 (155 children, 265 adults) of the planned 600 patients were randomized, the trial was terminated after a planned interim analysis revealed a significant increase in pulmonary related serious adverse events (SAE) in adults receiving BIIL 284 BS. Final analysis revealed SAEs in 36.1% of adults receiving BIIL 284 BS vs. 21.2% receiving placebo (p=0.007), and in 29.6% of children receiving BIIL 284 BS vs. 22.9% receiving placebo (p= 0.348). In adults, the incidence of protocol-defined pulmonary exacerbation was greater in those receiving BIIL 284 BS than in those receiving placebo (33.1% vs. 18.2% respectively; p=0.005). In children, the incidence of protocol-defined pulmonary exacerbation was 19.8% in the BIIL 284 BS arm, and 25.7% in the placebo arm (p=0.38). Conclusions While the cause of increased SAEs and exacerbations due to BIIL 284 BS is unknown, the outcome of this trial provides a cautionary tale for the administration of potent anti-inflammatory compounds to individuals with chronic infections, as the potential to significantly suppress the inflammatory response may increase the risk of infection-related adverse events.

No abstract